Live data from Hacker News

Forced unemployment and second-class status: Google's data center contractors

protocol.com

91–100 of 238 posts

Re: Forced unemployment and second-class status: Google's data center contractors

#91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like that you're blunt about it, makes it much easier to reason why more regulation around labor is required. "BigCorp will avoid as much labor costs as possible. To improve labor conditions and compensation, regulation must require it."

"To ensure that people only have good jobs, we must ensure that people who cannot get good jobs are unemployable."

"How can we justify Big Tech being worth trillions collectively without allowing them to treat their workers as interchangeable widgets at the lowest cost possible."

Which sounds better to an electorate? What are the odds your average citizen is ever going to be an ultra high net worth individual or work at a FAANG? I believe the odds are in regulatory favor.

Google has the resources (with gross profit ~$100 billion for 2020), they simply choose to evade labor law in this case.

Re: Forced unemployment and second-class status: Google's data center contractors

#92
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Impractical" and "not throwing away money" are really interesting choices of words when discussing why one of the world's richest companies gives PTO or health insurance.

I think it's a lot less interesting than people want to pretend it is. A company's willingness to throw away money should be largely invariant to its overall financial health.

Except in this case "throw away money" is a euphemism for "paying workers enough that they don't need welfare to support their families."

Re: Forced unemployment and second-class status: Google's data center contractors

#93
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they could hire them as employees. This is not temporary work, they only use agencies to save money and circumvent workers protections. I get that there are freelancers who like not being employees but that's not the case here. I bet most Temps at Google would love getting employee status and there's no reason most of them shouldn't. It's not like Google couldn't afford the extra payroll.

>Or they could hire them as employees. some people don't want to be employees, they want to be contractors.

But this argument presupposes that employee v. contractor is a choice that the worker or the company is allowed to make. It's emphatically, objectively not. It's a tax designation. There are lines and rules that define which of those you are.

Re: Forced unemployment and second-class status: Google's data center contractors

#94
I’m getting tired of these low-value workers complaining they should be paid as well as high-value workers.

They were hired with no skills, and were trained from the ground up. They are getting a livable wage but now they want more. If they want more, they need to elevate their worth and become high value employees or find a better job that values them better.

They are contractors. Because of their particular life experiences and life choices, they were unable to come as a more valuable employee. Google doesn’t owe them anything except the job they offered them. If they want better terms they can ask, but Google will refuse. So it’s on them to find a better job.

But please stop complaining about it and think you’re more valuable than you actually are. They can be replaced by someone who has no skills and can be trained from scratch, just like they were. The pay is fair, the conditions are good. That’s better than many jobs out there.

Re: Forced unemployment and second-class status: Google's data center contractors

#95
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The right thing for the company to do would be to hire people as employees, but it appears that worker protections are too strong for them to want to financially. Universal healthcare/dental/paid leave would allow for companies who’s employees currently are the only receivers of these “benefits” to not require companies to hold onto people so long. Worker protections are supposed to be so that catastrophic job loss i…

Employee-status may come with certain benefits, but it also comes with many drawbacks and burdens for the employee. For me, and probably many on this board, the biggest risk is "works-for-hire". Under US law, contractors have strong legal protections of their own intellectual protection. Whereas it's much easier for a W-2 employer to claim IP made in personal time. I don't really care about healthcare of unemployment…

Or, your state could protect W-2 employees’ IP developed on personal time and equipment, as California does. You are barking up the wrong tree.

Re: Forced unemployment and second-class status: Google's data center contractors

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is all due to Microsoft contractors (who were treated like regular employees in the 80s and 90s) winning a lawsuit that retroactively forced Microsoft to give them a ton of stock. This is all due to Microsoft who used contractors like regular employees in the 80s and 90s but did not compensate them like regular employees. It's not the workers fault.

The Microsoft contractors double-dipped. They got higher-than-employee wages during their contracts, and later got all the stock options they gave up by being contractors. Nice work if you can get it.

I don't know the exact numbers for this case, but contractors always appear to be overpaid. What most people who call them overpaid miss is that contractors have to pay their own employment taxes, as well as any health benefits (including vacation time) they want out of that income.

If you consider those, the cost of your average employee to the company employing them is roughly 1.6x to 2x their gross income. An overpaid contractor would have to make well over 2x that of a normal employee.

Re: Forced unemployment and second-class status: Google's data center contractors

#97
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also had to engage with this bodyshop arrangement. Heard a fellow contractor referring to it as "paying the pimp", which I guess has some similarities. It's worth noting that you can usually contract directly with a company as long as you maintain scoped part-time contracts with multiple companies, instead of a single open-ended long-term contract with a single company. It's true that independent contractors are so…

Isn't it? Isn't that what the "bodyshop" is for? To protect the dynamic the buyer exploited previously, but now with a rent-seeker in the middle? It doesn't seem like the workers on either end are better protected as a result. Honestly asking.

You're mostly right, although the way I see it is this: there are a few subclasses of independent contractor. At the top are people with high hourly rates who have niche skillsets and want to work on their own with minimal involvement in the company with which they have a contract. In the middle are the perma-temps involved in the Microsoft lawsuit or at H-1B shops, usually fairly well-paid but lacking many benefits like stock grants. At the bottom are the precarious underclass of people outlined in the article who make close to minimum wage. Then of course you have the gig workers (Uber, Instacart, etc.) who are paid piecemeal.

It used to be the people at the top could have their cake & eat it too, where sometimes they'd have long open-ended contracts with a company directly - maintaining independence but also getting a steady paycheck. Now they have to shack up with one of these bodyshops that gets a fat cut of their labor, which disincentivizes the setup. I was certainly glad to get out of it; the whole operation felt shady from start to finish. Politically, this class of people used to be available as cover for the entirety of the contracting workforce. Did lawmakers really want to rob these All-American Mavericks of their Freedom? Anything that further disincentivizes the mock W-2 job route is a good thing IMO. The current situation of course is not sufficient but it's better than the free-for-all it used to be. I guess you could say it has hightened the contradictions.

Some might say given the reality of these distinctions within independent contractors, we should segregate protections based on income. I don't think that'll work. Any policy targeted at helping only those of lower means will quickly become a policy to be watered down further and further and further as all the incentives in the system are aligned toward greater exploitation. By including all classes of independent contractor in any legislation, we make it stronger against attacks that would land hardest on the worst off. If that shuts down some avenues of employment for people at the top, well, so be it. I don't think scoped contracts will ever go away.

Worth noting this entire thing is to some degree a sideshow of the larger debate about health insurance and how it's tied to employment. If medicare for all were passed, a lot of these issues would just go away.

Re: Forced unemployment and second-class status: Google's data center contractors

#98
post #13

>Contractors love the good pay and engaging work in Google's data centers. They resent that Google and its staffing firm, Modis Engineering, make them quit every two years. >[...] But those two-year contracts are written in stone. Workers like Wait are not usually allowed to apply either to renew their contracts or to do the same job as a Google employee. If they want to keep working in the same job, they have to lea…

Very similar to the introduction of IR35 legislation in the UK.

Re: Forced unemployment and second-class status: Google's data center contractors

#99
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who would keep the data centers running? The invisible hand of the market? Labor does stuff.

They They could hire a smaller of more qualified and invest more into automation. The only reason Google is doing this is because they don't want to spend the same amount on benefits and other overhead on 15$ per hour worker as they do for a 30$ per hour one.

They have the $15/hour contractors lugging batteries, hell yea they should invest in automation, but unfortunately as you point out the legal environment does not incentivize them to do so.

Re: Forced unemployment and second-class status: Google's data center contractors

#100
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that would just compound the grief. Endless media articles on how certain employees are considered second class citizens at Google.

Doesn’t this whole thread make it pretty clear that they are?

And this is when they are not actual employees so there is at least legal cover. If Google made them employee it would be 100 times worse.

Mind you, I am not somehow advocating that Google must not hire them. From a culture/ country other than America, I see people can be treated with respect but not paid lot of money mainly because there is not much money to around. But people receiving also understand not a lot of money can be given for certain tasks.

However modern media culture is worst. If Google were to hire full time, I can see headlines "World Richest company pay pittance for back breaking work". And point about job security , benefits would be forgotten.

One can check coverage of full time Amazon warehouse workers on how it plays out. I have never heard a good story about it. Or how other companies hiring warehouse workers doing compare to Amazon across America or world.

Post reply on HN