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

Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 155 posts

Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees

#91

Post by andrekandre »

throwaway45501 wrote: post #88
lenkite wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Business is not your friend, it's not your family. The only goal of business is to make profit. If they can make something good along the way - great, but don't expect them to do it. Yep, this is what the robber baron capitalists of the USA also used to believe - profit at the expense of human life. You are simply proving the point here that the only way to win is civil dis-obedience. Boycott, blockade, unionize an…

I view this behavior as an emerging property, and I don't think you can get rid of it. What we as a society can do is educate people that companies are not your friends, that they are amoral, and they exist to maximize their profits. I think we shouldn't allow them to make political donations or support any charity or social movement because this makes them seem "friendly," - which is a net negative for society. Can…

  > I would love to see a global agreement to cap the wealth of any individual at $1 billion dollars and the total market value of any company at $100bn (those numbers are arbitrary).
how would you get any country to agree to such a thing?

Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees

#92

Post by jsnell »

MrOwnPut wrote: post #55
dragonwriter wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“birth parents” and “biological parents” are synonyms, and have been as long as I’ve been alive (well, at least using language.) This is not some novel usage. Adopted, so kind of forced to be aware of things like that.

Interesting. From your perspective, what's the % of how often you have heard "biological" vs "birth" parents and has the rate changed any? I'm curious as to why the change of what I've heard (biological parents) and in the recent year (birth parents).

Most likely there has been no such change. You've just started paying attention to it for some reason. Looking at a couple of data sources for popularity of terms over time, "birth parent" has been consistently more used:

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Biological+par...

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=Biologic...

Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees

#93

Post by UncleMeat »

temp20160423 wrote: post #15
m348e912 wrote: post #2

Why should Google pay maternity leave for laid off workers? They are no longer employees once they're laid off. At the very most they deserve a severence.

G attracted workers by offering this baby bonding leave and increased it recently from 12 weeks to 18 weeks. Even amazon is letting people on leave finish it before their severance starts according to the article. This whole layoff round at G looks extremely rushed and someone probably didn't think through all the edge cases, such as people already on leave. For 20 years, G's main advantage was top of market perks an…

Yep. I know so many people that joined google from other places because of the culture and perks. I certainly chose not to leave because of those things. That calculus is clearly changing.

Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees

#94

Post by UncleMeat »

throwaway45501 wrote: post #17
foepys wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And people wonder why birth rates are falling and people are afraid to make long term commitments. Corporations like this don't deserve any loyalty. If I worked there and anybody offered to pay me even a few percent more, I'd leave in a heartbeat. I probably wouldn't even work hard, only the bare minimum to not get fired, because why should I? In conservative media this this is being spun as "nobody wants to work any…

Do you keep paying a plumber once they complete their job? As employee I enter into mutually beneficial (and in case of IT and FAANG - extremely beneficial) contract knowing that I can be fired once the company deems my services no longer necessary. The backlash comes from highest educated, best skilled people who received high salaries and who have great prospects of being hired again quickly. Why they suffer? Shoul…

The idea that the laid off people “completed their job” is just false.

Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees

#95

Post by UncleMeat »

throwaway45501 wrote: post #86
ryandrake wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[EDIT to remove the pot shot in the first paragraph but I still think OP has got to be trolling. But in case you really aren’t…] Layoffs are bad because they are deceptive and cruel to those laid off and further erode trust from those not yet laid off. They are deceptive because being hired as an employee traditionally carries with it implied permanence that being hired as a temp or contractor (like your plumber) doe…

Who told you that you'll have a job until your performance drops? Was that the contract? You'll have a job for as long as you're needed to the company. Once your services are no longer required you'll be laid off. Why should anyone pay you if they no longer need your services? Is this the social contract in USA? I see nothing deceptive nor cruel in it, unless Google promised not to fired these people Now, Visa worker…

People do make plans based on continued employment. Like, people move across the country and sign a year long lease for a job. There’s no avoiding that.

Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees

#96

Post by pandaman »

foepys wrote: post #9
throwaway45501 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it the company's responsibility to keep employees that are no longer necessary? I don't understand that. Did Google or any other company promised these people that they will be hired forever? Google hired them and paid them very cushy salaries. What am I missing? I really don't understand the discussion around those recent layoffs.

And people wonder why birth rates are falling and people are afraid to make long term commitments. Corporations like this don't deserve any loyalty. If I worked there and anybody offered to pay me even a few percent more, I'd leave in a heartbeat. I probably wouldn't even work hard, only the bare minimum to not get fired, because why should I? In conservative media this this is being spun as "nobody wants to work any…

People by and large do not exercise loyalty to their employers. This is why companies pay "sign up" bonus, so people could switch jobs over a relatively small bump (otherwise you'd lose a month or two of salary, which would push you into a net negative for almost two years over a 10% bump), and why the bonuses/RSU grants vest on a schedule (so you always have some money to lose when you resign).

Companies that work on loyalty do not have anything of the above, as their loyal employees won't be persuaded by a bigger TC number. Their TC is not high and they are not public too. It would be bizarre for somebody who went to Google or other such company because of the TC (likely applying to multiple jobs out of school or resigning from the previous job) to expect loyalty from the employer.

Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees

#97

Post by WirelessGigabit »

Manheim wrote: post #27

In Scandinavia this is regulated by law. Being on leave does not protect against dismissal in Norway. But the Working Environment Act states that the notice period does not start to run until the leave period has expired. And, the fact that you are on leave cannot in itself be used by the employer as a reason for dismissal. So, if Google had laid off a worker in Norway who was on leave, they wouldn't have much choice…

Not only that. I'm assuming that in Norway you have a notice period which is tied to how long you work there.

Not the case here.

I could sign a mortgage Monday and be laid off Tuesday.

So then my income and insurance just stop.

Companies have no obligation to give you notice. Anything they do is literally out of the good of their PR people. Some states require payout of accrued vacation days (notice the government doesn't mandate any amount of vacation days, it's all up to negotiation).

Then you can go on unemployment, but for some reason it's capped in amount per month, so even if I make $200,000/year, which after taxes becomes $11,000/month. I live in a HCOL, my unemployment would be ~$450/week, so ~ $2,000/month. Which is less than my rent. And I pay A LOT of taxes.

Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees

#98

Post by pandaman »

ryandrake wrote: post #53
throwaway45501 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you keep paying a plumber once they complete their job? As employee I enter into mutually beneficial (and in case of IT and FAANG - extremely beneficial) contract knowing that I can be fired once the company deems my services no longer necessary. The backlash comes from highest educated, best skilled people who received high salaries and who have great prospects of being hired again quickly. Why they suffer? Shoul…

[EDIT to remove the pot shot in the first paragraph but I still think OP has got to be trolling. But in case you really aren’t…] Layoffs are bad because they are deceptive and cruel to those laid off and further erode trust from those not yet laid off. They are deceptive because being hired as an employee traditionally carries with it implied permanence that being hired as a temp or contractor (like your plumber) doe…

"Full time perm" means that the employer does not know for how long the job is needed, not that the job will be needed forever.

If there is no obligation for the employee to work forever, then there should not be an obligation for the employer to provide work forever too.

Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees

#99

Post by throwaway45501 »

andrekandre wrote: post #91
throwaway45501 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I view this behavior as an emerging property, and I don't think you can get rid of it. What we as a society can do is educate people that companies are not your friends, that they are amoral, and they exist to maximize their profits. I think we shouldn't allow them to make political donations or support any charity or social movement because this makes them seem "friendly," - which is a net negative for society. Can…

> I would love to see a global agreement to cap the wealth of any individual at $1 billion dollars and the total market value of any company at $100bn (those numbers are arbitrary). how would you get any country to agree to such a thing?

I'm terribly sorry, I can't describe my idea and expect to stay anonymous. If I would ever describe it again I could be linked to the account, which defeats purpose of creating the throwaway account.

One day I hope to be a billionaire and at least try to change the system. I would gladly spend nost of my wealth to see this happen.

Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees

#100

Post by Manheim »

WirelessGigabit wrote: post #97
Manheim wrote: post #27

In Scandinavia this is regulated by law. Being on leave does not protect against dismissal in Norway. But the Working Environment Act states that the notice period does not start to run until the leave period has expired. And, the fact that you are on leave cannot in itself be used by the employer as a reason for dismissal. So, if Google had laid off a worker in Norway who was on leave, they wouldn't have much choice…

Not only that. I'm assuming that in Norway you have a notice period which is tied to how long you work there. Not the case here. I could sign a mortgage Monday and be laid off Tuesday. So then my income and insurance just stop. Companies have no obligation to give you notice. Anything they do is literally out of the good of their PR people. Some states require payout of accrued vacation days (notice the government do…

Sounds like things are broken.

We have a minimum notice period of three months in Norway, and many have a contract that give them more than that. This is a mutual obligation, so if you want to quit your job for a new one, you will have to stay in your current for the notice period.

How much unemployment support you get depends on your salary level, and it has an upper cap, but it should be sufficient enough to keep you floating while you seek for a new job. It is not a sleeping pillow, though. You do not get a full compensation.

You get the support until you get a new job or for 12 months. If you are still without a job after 12 months you can apply for another 12 months period. If you are not able to get a new job within this period you will have to rely on other types of public support if you are entitled to any of them.

You might think that this would lead to people not wanting to get a new job immediately. However, the unemployment rate is currently at 3,4 percent.

Post reply on HN