Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

whenrulesdontapply.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 289 posts

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#81

Post by justfor1comment »

turc1656 wrote: post #11

Notice the difference: " Top executives of leading tech companies secretly agreed among themselves not to hire each other’s employees" "...brought charges against the companies " They should have been indicting both, or just the executives for their explicit role in this criminal behavior. I really detest the lack of individual accountability in all these cases when we deal with large companies. If this was a couple…

Being a rich executive is essentially a get out of jail free card in America. Only good outcome for us commoners is that they can't screw us in the same way again. They have to invent a new way next time.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#82

Post by skybrian »

dropit_sphere wrote: post #14
keepper wrote: post #2

So while this is bad... I don't know how to feel about this. The other side of the coin is that these companies pay WAY ABOVE average salaries. I'm intimately familiar with this having FAANG companies average of 50% more compensation than average. Especially outside of the bay area. Typical range TC Sr. SDE in nyc: 150-250k + Bonus. Typical range TC for Sr. SDE in nyc: for Google/Facebook/Amazon 300-400k ( and goes h…

"Remember kids, profit is for capital , never labor. Know the difference!"

When compensation includes stock options and RSU's the lines are somewhat blurry. And isn't this what such financial incentives are for, to align incentives?

But then, you have multiple classes of stock which undoes that somewhat. Incentives are never fully aligned; there are always things like principal-agent problems.

So I agree in substance if not in snark: it is important to understand these things.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#83

Post by dsfyu404ed »

mtgx wrote: post #49
crowdpleaser wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Just following orders" was a valid excuse until the Nuremberg trials.

You don't think people were executed post-war for "just following orders" before the Nuremberg trials? In other words, do you really think such people got off easy before the Nuremberg trials? If anything, much worse has happened to them throughout history, because the kings and dictators didn't have to put them through a judicial process.

Whether or not you're punished for following orders has more to do with whether or not you're on the side that writes history than anything else.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#84

Post by deogeo »

jammygit wrote: post #79
munk-a wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, there is far too much ability to transfer liability in the modern world which lets this sort of stuff get abstract and easier to dismiss. Companies should be held accountable to the extent their growth has encouraged bad behavior, but individuals at that company committed the behavior and, if they were instructed to do so and blindly followed then... 1. "Just following orders" isn't now and has never been a…

Transfer of liability? There are candid emails between Steve jobs and Schmidt about the topic. Edit: They made a minor settlement and there was a lawsuit that got a tiny amount of press. http://time.com/42322/steve-jobs-chilling-response-after-get... Edit 2: there was not even a slap on the wrist legally speaking: "The proposed settlement, which if accepted by the court will be in effect for five years, prohibits the…

...am I understanding it correctly that their 'punishment' was having to promise not to break the law again? But only for five years??

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#85

Post by dsfyu404ed »

macspoofing wrote: post #42
turc1656 wrote: post #11

Notice the difference: " Top executives of leading tech companies secretly agreed among themselves not to hire each other’s employees" "...brought charges against the companies " They should have been indicting both, or just the executives for their explicit role in this criminal behavior. I really detest the lack of individual accountability in all these cases when we deal with large companies. If this was a couple…

Meh. It really wasn't that big of a deal. They got caught and fined and that feels like an appropriate level of punishment. There are times when a prison-term against bad-actor executives is the right punishment ... this isn't it. >If this was a couple of small, local competitors who were the only two [whatever] in the area and they did this, I guarantee you the owners would be individually indicted. No. 100% NO. I g…

>No. 100% NO. I guarantee you that the regulators wouldn't care. And if they did care, the 'local competitors' would get AT BEST a slap on the wrist like a strongly worded letter with a time-frame or MAYBE a fine (if that). There would be no indictments.

Unless of course an indictment is the politically determined goal. E.g. that one small Chinese bank that got screwed for the lending bubble that popped in '08.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#86

Post by dsfyu404ed »

stcredzero wrote: post #72
Animats wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not determinative, but it shows who to investigate.

"It shows who to investigate," also implies a predetermined outcome and guilt. It's more that it shows there's something to investigate, period. In 2019, we should be cautious about applying bulk statistics instantly to blame or suspicion. It's that sort of attitude which propagates the 70% wage gap myth, when more detailed analyses narrow this to 94%. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=it0EYBBl5LI I think, in the case…

Agreed. Such an approach would be a money wasting dragnet. Once upon a time the DEA tried a similar approach and began investigating people for buying bill counters (drug traffickers count a lot of bills). They eventually admitted it was a massive waste of time because without another reliable data source to correlate it with it just generated low quality leads that basically always led to nothing.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#87

Post by dsfyu404ed »

rak00n wrote: post #38
wyldfire wrote: post #34

> A separate class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of 64,000 tech workers for an estimated $3 billion in lost wages. Before the case went to trial, the companies settled for a total of $435 million. How would we know if they resumed the bad behavior?

That's only $6796.87 per person.

Depending on how much the mean/median person's base salary is that's on the order of a bonus. On one hand it's not that much. On the other hand I'd be pissed if I didn't get my bonus because of some back room deal between execs.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#88

Post by jorgemf »

rightbyte wrote: post #54
DINKDINK wrote: post #43

I wonder how much small firms/startups have /benefited/ from this arrangement. By artificially reducing demand for labor, big tech firms have effectively made it more profitable for smaller firms to compete against them.

I think you got it the other way around. They have decreased the price of labour and thus increased the demand for it. This is more or less an employer union.

I don't get your point. As I understand it they have decreased the demand to decrease the price.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#89

Post by gok »

> Top executives of leading tech companies secretly agreed among themselves not to hire each other’s employees

That's not accurate. The agreement was about recruiters cold-calling each other's employees. Employees were free to reach out on their own between companies. Workers routinely switched companies while the agreement was in effect.

I still think it was bullshit, but it wasn't quite as egregious as the article makes it sound.

Disclaimer: I was one of the affected employees, and got a share of the settlement.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#90

Post by skybrian »

cliffy wrote: post #60
skybrian wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a long time ago. I got a raise out of it and later retired early, and I'm a pretty average software engineer, for Google anyway. Your argument that I "suffered" when actually they treated me very well by almost any standard isn't going to work. Based on what I've heard about current salaries for in-demand people, I think it's safe to say that any depressing effect on software engineers' salaries is long gone?…

This reads like Stockholm Syndrome at its finest. You're OK with them paying you less because you still got paid well by some standard? You (and as a result many other people) would be making more both in the past and today if they hadn't colluded. For at least some subset of those affected by this collusion the salary lost will make a significant difference in their families' and their own quality of life either now…

It was never OK, but it was settled, they don't do that anymore, and besides, Steve Jobs (who apparently started it) is dead.

And as for the people theoretically adversely affected, you'd have to figure out who they are, which wouldn't be easy, since it's people who were in demand enough that they might have started a bidding war.

There is not much more justice to be had in this case. If you're interested in pursuing justice, why not focus on current problems with identifiable victims?

Post reply on HN