9 ms·

Alphabet donates its employees' holiday gifts to charity

26 points by wollstonecraft 10y ago

arkitaip 10y ago
If Alphabet wants to do goodwill marketing, so be it. But doing so at the expense of their employees is kinda shitty. Did employees at least have the option to select which charity to donate to?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- corpus 10y ago
  no, they did not
- mgiannopoulos 10y ago
  They didn't announce it so is it really marketing?
  - qbrass 10y ago
    It's more effective marketing when people don't believe it's marketing.
ocdtrekkie 10y ago
It's kinda funny how they spun it to employees, because what happened here, is Google bought itself a tax write-off. The article misses that when it suggests that it's "not exactly a cost-saving move". And I mean, heck, I don't work at a Fortune 500, but my company gave me a Christmas gift worth more than a Google Home.
- euyyn 10y ago
  I don't know much about corporate taxes, but isn't a charity donation the same tax write-off as a Christmas gift to employees, if they cost the same? And is either of those different than the write-off for business-related costs? In other words, do corporate taxes look at more than "total revenue - total costs"?
  - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
    I also don't know too much about corporate taxes, but I'm pretty sure there's some benefits to giving to actual charities that goes beyond a regular business expense. "Total revenue - total costs" is the sort of tax a business can pay if their revenue is small and simple. Once you get into itemized taxes, there's all sorts of tax credits and such. As an additional note, all the schools Google have these Google-tied products to will be bound to Google's service products, so, it benefits them in that way as well.
    - euyyn 10y ago
      > all the schools Google have these Google-tied products to will be bound to Google's service products, so, it benefits them in that way as well. I mean, yeah obviously. But I wouldn't really expect Google to give MacBooks or Windows notebooks to those schools, and it probably would be a worse option even if they did.
      - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
        As someone living with a student plagued by a school-issued Chromebook, I beg to differ. Especially for a student that could run AutoCAD and similar useful software even on a very cheap Windows PC. The point is, it's really not a "gift". They gave themselves a tax break, by "donating" some hardware that ensures them future business via services. It takes some hardcore groupthink to be convinced that it's otherwise.
        euyyn 10y ago
        > It's really not a "gift". > It takes some hardcore groupthink to be convinced that it's otherwise. lol so you'd rather your school not be able to afford issuing your kid any laptop whatsoever? Do the teachers at your school want the kids to use AutoCAD, but someone forced them to buy Chromebooks? More than half the schools are voting for this with their money already http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/03/googles-chromebooks-make-up-half-of-us-classroom-devices.html http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/03/googles-chromebooks-make-up-h... If your Google conspiracy is true, why is the company so cunning, but at the same time dumb enough not to extend the gift to all schools?
dbg31415 10y ago
Giving away money earmarked for employee appreciation to charity doesn't get Google points with the press, or their staff. This isn't a good move by Google. Employees don't depend on Christmas gifts, but they are certainly nice. It's a great time for the company to say, with a simple little gesture, "Thanks, we really appreciate you." The company can also give money to charity... not like Google has a shortage of money. But yeah, this... it comes off as telling the Google Employees, "You're a bunch of ungrateful, over-privileged, spoiled brats... so I gave your gifts to people who would appreciate them more."
mgiannopoulos 10y ago
What's the average salary at Google? Does getting a Google Home or even a Pixel (which they can easily afford imho) really mean something to the employee?
- ocdtrekkie 10y ago
  Probably not, but it's a nice thing to do. Telling everyone you're giving their gift to someone else is honestly kind of a nasty thing to do, even if it's a donation. It actually would've been less bad if they didn't tell their employees their gift was going elsewhere.
  - euyyn 10y ago
    I'm pretty happy about it to be honest. The previous years they always let us choose the "give it to charity" option and I never did. But I much rather a kid in a poor school get a chromebook, than I get a gadget I can afford. It's kind of like paying income taxes vs giving to charities. I'd probably vote for my taxes to go up more than I would increase tomorrow my private donations, it's psychologically easier.
    - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
      Let me put this another way: Do you believe Google can only afford to do one or the other? Can't they treat their employees well and donate to charity?
      - euyyn 10y ago
        Oh I'm positive the company can afford both. In fact, my understanding is that their "regular" donations to charity, as in apart from this holiday gift, is many many times the value of the gift. Don't get me wrong, if they donated all those things, and gave me some gadget, I'd be happy. But with a cool head, I rather the cost of that gadget be added to the donation too.
    - automatwon 10y ago
      The previous years they always let us choose the "give it to charity" option and I never did. But I much rather a kid in a poor school get a chromebook... I'd probably vote for my taxes to go up more... it's psychologically easier. Was clicking a 'give it to charity' option too psychologically hard?
prodigal_erik 10y ago
I always thought Google gave out hardware strategically because they wanted every engineer to easily do side projects targeting, e.g., a phone with up-to-date Android and a smartwatch. I wonder if this means end-user adoption is now more important.
- euyyn 10y ago
  Nah, as an employee you probably already have a corporate phone, and I'm sure you can get a corporate smartwatch too without problem. So it wouldn't really be an effective strategy.
  - greygray 10y ago
    TBH my theory is that Google gave surplus inventory to their employees with previous holiday gifts (and my understanding is that different countries got different holiday gifts). The Pixel phone supply chain is really tight considering you can't even get a 128GB phone right now. Google Homes seemed to have sold quite well this holiday season as well so the prospect of conjuring 68000 Google Homes and dispersing them across the world to the 100+ offices at Google was probably a bit logistically taxing.
no_bad_gifts 10y ago
Not sure how to feel about this one. On one hand the people who end up with the gifts will be grateful I'm sure. On the other hand it was at the expense of the employees, who had no say in it. Maybe they should have been given the option to donate or receive on a person-to-person basis?

If Alphabet wants to do goodwill marketing, so be it. But doing so at the expense of their employees is kinda shitty. Did employees at least have the option to select which charity to donate to?

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
corpus 10y ago
no, they did not
mgiannopoulos 10y ago
They didn't announce it so is it really marketing?
- qbrass 10y ago
  It's more effective marketing when people don't believe it's marketing.

ocdtrekkie 10y ago

It's kinda funny how they spun it to employees, because what happened here, is Google bought itself a tax write-off. The article misses that when it suggests that it's "not exactly a cost-saving move". And I mean, heck, I don't work at a Fortune 500, but my company gave me a Christmas gift worth more than a Google Home.

euyyn 10y ago
I don't know much about corporate taxes, but isn't a charity donation the same tax write-off as a Christmas gift to employees, if they cost the same? And is either of those different than the write-off for business-related costs? In other words, do corporate taxes look at more than "total revenue - total costs"?
- ocdtrekkie 10y ago
  I also don't know too much about corporate taxes, but I'm pretty sure there's some benefits to giving to actual charities that goes beyond a regular business expense. "Total revenue - total costs" is the sort of tax a business can pay if their revenue is small and simple. Once you get into itemized taxes, there's all sorts of tax credits and such. As an additional note, all the schools Google have these Google-tied products to will be bound to Google's service products, so, it benefits them in that way as well.
  - euyyn 10y ago
    > all the schools Google have these Google-tied products to will be bound to Google's service products, so, it benefits them in that way as well. I mean, yeah obviously. But I wouldn't really expect Google to give MacBooks or Windows notebooks to those schools, and it probably would be a worse option even if they did.
    - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
      As someone living with a student plagued by a school-issued Chromebook, I beg to differ. Especially for a student that could run AutoCAD and similar useful software even on a very cheap Windows PC. The point is, it's really not a "gift". They gave themselves a tax break, by "donating" some hardware that ensures them future business via services. It takes some hardcore groupthink to be convinced that it's otherwise.
      - euyyn 10y ago
        > It's really not a "gift". > It takes some hardcore groupthink to be convinced that it's otherwise. lol so you'd rather your school not be able to afford issuing your kid any laptop whatsoever? Do the teachers at your school want the kids to use AutoCAD, but someone forced them to buy Chromebooks? More than half the schools are voting for this with their money already http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/03/googles-chromebooks-make-up-half-of-us-classroom-devices.html http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/03/googles-chromebooks-make-up-h... If your Google conspiracy is true, why is the company so cunning, but at the same time dumb enough not to extend the gift to all schools?

dbg31415 10y ago

Giving away money earmarked for employee appreciation to charity doesn't get Google points with the press, or their staff. This isn't a good move by Google. Employees don't depend on Christmas gifts, but they are certainly nice. It's a great time for the company to say, with a simple little gesture, "Thanks, we really appreciate you." The company can also give money to charity... not like Google has a shortage of money. But yeah, this... it comes off as telling the Google Employees, "You're a bunch of ungrateful, over-privileged, spoiled brats... so I gave your gifts to people who would appreciate them more."

mgiannopoulos 10y ago

What's the average salary at Google? Does getting a Google Home or even a Pixel (which they can easily afford imho) really mean something to the employee?

ocdtrekkie 10y ago
Probably not, but it's a nice thing to do. Telling everyone you're giving their gift to someone else is honestly kind of a nasty thing to do, even if it's a donation. It actually would've been less bad if they didn't tell their employees their gift was going elsewhere.
- euyyn 10y ago
  I'm pretty happy about it to be honest. The previous years they always let us choose the "give it to charity" option and I never did. But I much rather a kid in a poor school get a chromebook, than I get a gadget I can afford. It's kind of like paying income taxes vs giving to charities. I'd probably vote for my taxes to go up more than I would increase tomorrow my private donations, it's psychologically easier.
  - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
    Let me put this another way: Do you believe Google can only afford to do one or the other? Can't they treat their employees well and donate to charity?
    - euyyn 10y ago
      Oh I'm positive the company can afford both. In fact, my understanding is that their "regular" donations to charity, as in apart from this holiday gift, is many many times the value of the gift. Don't get me wrong, if they donated all those things, and gave me some gadget, I'd be happy. But with a cool head, I rather the cost of that gadget be added to the donation too.
  - automatwon 10y ago
    The previous years they always let us choose the "give it to charity" option and I never did. But I much rather a kid in a poor school get a chromebook... I'd probably vote for my taxes to go up more... it's psychologically easier. Was clicking a 'give it to charity' option too psychologically hard?

prodigal_erik 10y ago

I always thought Google gave out hardware strategically because they wanted every engineer to easily do side projects targeting, e.g., a phone with up-to-date Android and a smartwatch. I wonder if this means end-user adoption is now more important.

euyyn 10y ago
Nah, as an employee you probably already have a corporate phone, and I'm sure you can get a corporate smartwatch too without problem. So it wouldn't really be an effective strategy.
- greygray 10y ago
  TBH my theory is that Google gave surplus inventory to their employees with previous holiday gifts (and my understanding is that different countries got different holiday gifts). The Pixel phone supply chain is really tight considering you can't even get a 128GB phone right now. Google Homes seemed to have sold quite well this holiday season as well so the prospect of conjuring 68000 Google Homes and dispersing them across the world to the 100+ offices at Google was probably a bit logistically taxing.

no_bad_gifts 10y ago

Not sure how to feel about this one. On one hand the people who end up with the gifts will be grateful I'm sure. On the other hand it was at the expense of the employees, who had no say in it. Maybe they should have been given the option to donate or receive on a person-to-person basis?