6 ms·

Google's Page Allegedly Gave Rubin $150M Stock Award

123 points by smacktoward 8y ago

FreedomToCreate 8y ago
The potential golden parachutes are pre-negotiated into the contracts for these executives. Google could refuse them or alter them, but than will also probably still face litigation from that departing executive. The lawyers for the investors who are bringing this suit against google have a moral point but I proving any legal wrong doing is going to be hard. At least it brings to light how different compensation works when you are higher up on the ladder.
- entee 8y ago
  Golden Parachutes are usually in place for termination without just cause. Companies like Google (and many many others) prefer to have a friendly separation with no litigation so they just have them trigger (or give some other similar package) for the executive to go away. I wish more companies with resources such as Google would take a stand and fight. Even if you lose, for such a wealthy company the extra cost should be minimal. What does it say to your employees when they know that the higher up the ladder you are, the less accountable you are if you screw up? What does it say for a company to decline to enforce+defend its values in open court when it's really pressed?
  - throwaway6497 8y ago
    That Google is no different from all other companies in the valley as the values the company espouses are just fluff when rubber meets the road. Executives are exempt or excused. Different standards for execs compared to rank-and-file. Google has spent so much PR and money to convince employees that they are different from other companies. They are not. It is a hard pill to swallow for many starry-eyed employees who drank the cool-aid. Company has to fight tooth and nail to keep up the pretense before everyone internalizes that, "The emperor has no clothes".
  - wp381640 8y ago
    > I wish more companies with resources such as Google would take a stand and fight. I believe it has less to do with being well resourced and more to do with keeping internal politics and corporate secrets out of public court records
    - MFLoon 8y ago
      As well as lubricating the wheels of executive recruitment, because what exec is going to want to work for a place known to fight outgoing execs over their severance.
      - Aeolun 8y ago
        All the ones you do not hire from outside?
      - JohnJamesRambo 8y ago
        How many female (or any gender) execs want to work at a place giving $150 million to sex coercers on the way out?
        NavyNuke 8y ago
        Probably a lot because at that level they are making more than enough money...plus at a certain point, I'm sure they stop giving a shit about the rank-and-file employees...
    - entee 8y ago
      I think you're right. Still, screw it. If nobody ever takes a stand, this sort of thing will keep happening (and good on the lawyer representing the shareholders for suing) EDIT: clarification about shareholder suit
- URSpider94 8y ago
  This isn't that. A golden parachute is in place up-front in an employee contract. This is a spot bonus of $150MM that was awarded by the CEO to an employee under investigation, without following the corporate process.
- justicezyx 8y ago
  Let's remember that this company's world famous culture, and how that gathered goodwill from around the world. Then come back to look at this report. That's how people would then react.
kumarm 8y ago
Android Probably added 100-200B to GOOG Market Cap. I would say thats peanuts.
- KorematsuFred 8y ago
  I think many thought he should not get anything because the allegations of misconduct against Rubin. I personally think that is irrelevant, he should be fired for the misconduct but the fruits of his labour should not be denied to him. Android has made world a better place and Google along with all the employees a much better company financially.
- skybrian 8y ago
  This is another example of the fallacy where you give all the credit to the famous leader in the news. While leadership is important, it's not like he did it all himself.
  - B-Con 8y ago
    Nobody said he did. Turns out people are very happy to reward results. No one needs to do everything them self.
    - skybrian 8y ago
      Yeah, I just think everyone should be rewarded. The comment I was replying to attributed 100-200B in market cap to Rubin, rather than to the Android team, which is a lot of people. Back when I worked at Google, often when something new was announced at TGIF (even seemingly minor features), they'd have slides crediting everyone who helped, and it went on and on like movie credits.
  - bmurphy1976 8y ago
    The king sips wine from his golden chalice while his pawn's die on the battlefield.
  - bitL 8y ago
    Think about the alternative - somebody does a measurably great job, growing you a new multi-billion business from zero, even making you a dominant player. Later, that person ends up as a suspect of an unrelated crime, so you deny them any reward. Why would anyone with great potential want to work for you? From outside, it could all look like there is some possibility you orchestrated the whole problem to avoid paying, e.g. by analyzing that person's weaknesses, then paying somebody else to be a bait etc. There are indeed a few cases where co-founders were baited by VCs into illegal acts like buying drugs or hiring escorts and later coerced to "do the right thing" or else... That's probably not a signal you'd like to send.
throwaway6497 8y ago
Is Page still actively involved in Google? With the walkouts, and anger at Google's top level management for paying hush money to Andy, does he still have credibility with employees? Will they follow this leader? Will they consider him authentic? He is still an example of what great leadership is all about? People are fallible and sometimes show poor judgement. I get that. Just curious how does one come out of this unscathed. Will Google HR use PR techniques to protect Larry's aura at Google. Normal people usually get fired. Founders it seems are untouchable, especially at Google. Will be fascinating to see how all of this plays out.
- gojomo 8y ago
  I'd guess Page is wisely keeping a low profile, both inside and outside Google. He never sought the spotlight; he's had health problems with his voice that may still make being a regular spokesperson challenging. And, anyone who's a prominent "mascot" for a tech giant just gets a lot of unnecessarily personalized hate. Why not lie low and pick & choose where to influence things internally, if you have that luxury? How might Page come out of "this" unscathed? Well, I'm not sure to the board or stockholders, he's done anything wrong here. Those operating under a sort of "just world" assumption might wish Rubin suffers more for the reported managerial misdeeds. In practice, if he was promised giant compensation for the giant impact his projects have had on Google – and would have received this or larger compensation under the prior working assumption of continued employment – then pulling that back from Rubin could be an impractical battle for Google. Rubin might be willing to fight the allegations, in court, down to the last detail in a manner that could cost Google even more than this package. Also, Rubin knows all the proprietary details of Google's mobile strategy & forthcoming technologies. He's perhaps the one technologist in the world with the most knowledge and ability to launch an outside threat to Android's dominance.
- NavyNuke 8y ago
  > ...does he still have credibility with employees? What the fuck does "credibility" have to do with anything? I trade my skill/labor for money...who cares who the CEO/Founder is? > Will they follow this leader? He isn't leading a crusade...he's just a dude that founded the company that is my current employer...big deal > Will they consider him authentic? Who cares if he is authentic or not? I don't pay my mortgage with my CEO's authenticity... > He is still an example of what great leadership is all about? Not sure, don't care... I think you're dramatizing this whole Larry's aura thing...
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
joeshmoe23 8y ago
I think that a system that allows people who have produced (Page, Rubin) to be subject to to the tantrums (legal and otherwise) of those who didn't is a broken system.
- mortdeus 8y ago
  In my view a functional society is one where people are paid what their owed. Andy Rubin is owed his cut for android. And the women are owed what he promised them if only they'd sucked a little... well you get the picture. This is why things like this need to be handled in courtroom rather than the court of public opinion so a jury can decide whether the allegations warrant damages being paid out to the victims. The idea that you can just step in and deny somebody compensation without a judge present is frankly shocking for me to consider that this is where half of our society thinks we should go. If we started taking all the wealth from every man who has ever came off as creepy to woman, we'd be nation of men who are paupers and women who are desperately trying to give all the power back so they can find themselves actually attracted to the people they have to mate with.
  - dmix 8y ago
    So given this was still ‘allegations’ of sexual assault and not anything like a conviction in court, does the board have to act differently? Is there still a presumption of innocence, absent glaring evidence? I have a feeling this will always be a bit of a grey area out of pure practicality. But there seems to be a big push these days for immediate punishment, or everything gets the brakes put on, as soon as there is an allegation. Which considering the countless examples of failed convictions and direct examples of wrongful convictions (google is full of examples) this seems like a very dangerous road to go down.
    - DanBC 8y ago
      > not anything like a conviction in court, does the board have to act differently? Not sure what happens in the US, but in England even the courts behave differently from each other. The criminal court uses "beyond all reasonable doubt" while family courts use "balance of probabilities". A man can be found not guilty at criminal trial, and still have his children removed by family court because the finding of fact session at family court decides he more likely than not did the things he is accused of. A private organisation is free to do what they like, so long is it complies with the law and with the contracts they've drawn up.
mesozoic 8y ago
Good to see innovation appropriately rewarded to non executives.
- save_ferris 8y ago
  I think you misspelled "serial sexual harasser" there bud.
- CalChris 8y ago
  I think you misspelled senior vice president of mobile and digital content.
  - khazhou 8y ago
    I think his point is that the $150m (even $90m) is an outsized award for the team lead, compared to what the rest of the team received.
  - buryat 8y ago
    i think that was sarcasm
URSpider94 8y ago
People who are saying Rubin should be rewarded for creating Android ... he was, many times over. He worked at Google for almost a decade, I guarantee that he vested a ton of GSU’s. Also, Google bought his company, Danger, which is how he got there in the first place, so he got a big payday for that. Here’s more detail on how the whole thing shook out. Basically, he used the $150MM grant as a bargaining chip to settle for $90MM in return for resigning. This award was only given when he was already under investigation for misconduct - if this was really a reward for creating Android, Page could have handed it to him any time in the other 8.5 years that he worked at Google. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/03/11/technology/google-misconduct-exit-package.amp.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/03/11/tech...

123 points by smacktoward 8y ago

The potential golden parachutes are pre-negotiated into the contracts for these executives. Google could refuse them or alter them, but than will also probably still face litigation from that departing executive. The lawyers for the investors who are bringing this suit against google have a moral point but I proving any legal wrong doing is going to be hard. At least it brings to light how different compensation works when you are higher up on the ladder.

entee 8y ago
Golden Parachutes are usually in place for termination without just cause. Companies like Google (and many many others) prefer to have a friendly separation with no litigation so they just have them trigger (or give some other similar package) for the executive to go away. I wish more companies with resources such as Google would take a stand and fight. Even if you lose, for such a wealthy company the extra cost should be minimal. What does it say to your employees when they know that the higher up the ladder you are, the less accountable you are if you screw up? What does it say for a company to decline to enforce+defend its values in open court when it's really pressed?
- throwaway6497 8y ago
  That Google is no different from all other companies in the valley as the values the company espouses are just fluff when rubber meets the road. Executives are exempt or excused. Different standards for execs compared to rank-and-file. Google has spent so much PR and money to convince employees that they are different from other companies. They are not. It is a hard pill to swallow for many starry-eyed employees who drank the cool-aid. Company has to fight tooth and nail to keep up the pretense before everyone internalizes that, "The emperor has no clothes".
- wp381640 8y ago
  > I wish more companies with resources such as Google would take a stand and fight. I believe it has less to do with being well resourced and more to do with keeping internal politics and corporate secrets out of public court records
  - MFLoon 8y ago
    As well as lubricating the wheels of executive recruitment, because what exec is going to want to work for a place known to fight outgoing execs over their severance.
    - Aeolun 8y ago
      All the ones you do not hire from outside?
    - JohnJamesRambo 8y ago
      How many female (or any gender) execs want to work at a place giving $150 million to sex coercers on the way out?
      - NavyNuke 8y ago
        Probably a lot because at that level they are making more than enough money...plus at a certain point, I'm sure they stop giving a shit about the rank-and-file employees...
  - entee 8y ago
    I think you're right. Still, screw it. If nobody ever takes a stand, this sort of thing will keep happening (and good on the lawyer representing the shareholders for suing) EDIT: clarification about shareholder suit
URSpider94 8y ago
This isn't that. A golden parachute is in place up-front in an employee contract. This is a spot bonus of $150MM that was awarded by the CEO to an employee under investigation, without following the corporate process.
justicezyx 8y ago
Let's remember that this company's world famous culture, and how that gathered goodwill from around the world. Then come back to look at this report. That's how people would then react.

kumarm 8y ago

Android Probably added 100-200B to GOOG Market Cap. I would say thats peanuts.

KorematsuFred 8y ago
I think many thought he should not get anything because the allegations of misconduct against Rubin. I personally think that is irrelevant, he should be fired for the misconduct but the fruits of his labour should not be denied to him. Android has made world a better place and Google along with all the employees a much better company financially.
skybrian 8y ago
This is another example of the fallacy where you give all the credit to the famous leader in the news. While leadership is important, it's not like he did it all himself.
- B-Con 8y ago
  Nobody said he did. Turns out people are very happy to reward results. No one needs to do everything them self.
  - skybrian 8y ago
    Yeah, I just think everyone should be rewarded. The comment I was replying to attributed 100-200B in market cap to Rubin, rather than to the Android team, which is a lot of people. Back when I worked at Google, often when something new was announced at TGIF (even seemingly minor features), they'd have slides crediting everyone who helped, and it went on and on like movie credits.
- bmurphy1976 8y ago
  The king sips wine from his golden chalice while his pawn's die on the battlefield.
- bitL 8y ago
  Think about the alternative - somebody does a measurably great job, growing you a new multi-billion business from zero, even making you a dominant player. Later, that person ends up as a suspect of an unrelated crime, so you deny them any reward. Why would anyone with great potential want to work for you? From outside, it could all look like there is some possibility you orchestrated the whole problem to avoid paying, e.g. by analyzing that person's weaknesses, then paying somebody else to be a bait etc. There are indeed a few cases where co-founders were baited by VCs into illegal acts like buying drugs or hiring escorts and later coerced to "do the right thing" or else... That's probably not a signal you'd like to send.

throwaway6497 8y ago

Is Page still actively involved in Google? With the walkouts, and anger at Google's top level management for paying hush money to Andy, does he still have credibility with employees? Will they follow this leader? Will they consider him authentic? He is still an example of what great leadership is all about? People are fallible and sometimes show poor judgement. I get that. Just curious how does one come out of this unscathed. Will Google HR use PR techniques to protect Larry's aura at Google. Normal people usually get fired. Founders it seems are untouchable, especially at Google. Will be fascinating to see how all of this plays out.

gojomo 8y ago
I'd guess Page is wisely keeping a low profile, both inside and outside Google. He never sought the spotlight; he's had health problems with his voice that may still make being a regular spokesperson challenging. And, anyone who's a prominent "mascot" for a tech giant just gets a lot of unnecessarily personalized hate. Why not lie low and pick & choose where to influence things internally, if you have that luxury? How might Page come out of "this" unscathed? Well, I'm not sure to the board or stockholders, he's done anything wrong here. Those operating under a sort of "just world" assumption might wish Rubin suffers more for the reported managerial misdeeds. In practice, if he was promised giant compensation for the giant impact his projects have had on Google – and would have received this or larger compensation under the prior working assumption of continued employment – then pulling that back from Rubin could be an impractical battle for Google. Rubin might be willing to fight the allegations, in court, down to the last detail in a manner that could cost Google even more than this package. Also, Rubin knows all the proprietary details of Google's mobile strategy & forthcoming technologies. He's perhaps the one technologist in the world with the most knowledge and ability to launch an outside threat to Android's dominance.
NavyNuke 8y ago
> ...does he still have credibility with employees? What the fuck does "credibility" have to do with anything? I trade my skill/labor for money...who cares who the CEO/Founder is? > Will they follow this leader? He isn't leading a crusade...he's just a dude that founded the company that is my current employer...big deal > Will they consider him authentic? Who cares if he is authentic or not? I don't pay my mortgage with my CEO's authenticity... > He is still an example of what great leadership is all about? Not sure, don't care... I think you're dramatizing this whole Larry's aura thing...

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

joeshmoe23 8y ago

I think that a system that allows people who have produced (Page, Rubin) to be subject to to the tantrums (legal and otherwise) of those who didn't is a broken system.

mortdeus 8y ago
In my view a functional society is one where people are paid what their owed. Andy Rubin is owed his cut for android. And the women are owed what he promised them if only they'd sucked a little... well you get the picture. This is why things like this need to be handled in courtroom rather than the court of public opinion so a jury can decide whether the allegations warrant damages being paid out to the victims. The idea that you can just step in and deny somebody compensation without a judge present is frankly shocking for me to consider that this is where half of our society thinks we should go. If we started taking all the wealth from every man who has ever came off as creepy to woman, we'd be nation of men who are paupers and women who are desperately trying to give all the power back so they can find themselves actually attracted to the people they have to mate with.
- dmix 8y ago
  So given this was still ‘allegations’ of sexual assault and not anything like a conviction in court, does the board have to act differently? Is there still a presumption of innocence, absent glaring evidence? I have a feeling this will always be a bit of a grey area out of pure practicality. But there seems to be a big push these days for immediate punishment, or everything gets the brakes put on, as soon as there is an allegation. Which considering the countless examples of failed convictions and direct examples of wrongful convictions (google is full of examples) this seems like a very dangerous road to go down.
  - DanBC 8y ago
    > not anything like a conviction in court, does the board have to act differently? Not sure what happens in the US, but in England even the courts behave differently from each other. The criminal court uses "beyond all reasonable doubt" while family courts use "balance of probabilities". A man can be found not guilty at criminal trial, and still have his children removed by family court because the finding of fact session at family court decides he more likely than not did the things he is accused of. A private organisation is free to do what they like, so long is it complies with the law and with the contracts they've drawn up.

mesozoic 8y ago

Good to see innovation appropriately rewarded to non executives.

save_ferris 8y ago
I think you misspelled "serial sexual harasser" there bud.
CalChris 8y ago
I think you misspelled senior vice president of mobile and digital content.
- khazhou 8y ago
  I think his point is that the $150m (even $90m) is an outsized award for the team lead, compared to what the rest of the team received.
- buryat 8y ago
  i think that was sarcasm

URSpider94 8y ago

People who are saying Rubin should be rewarded for creating Android ... he was, many times over. He worked at Google for almost a decade, I guarantee that he vested a ton of GSU’s. Also, Google bought his company, Danger, which is how he got there in the first place, so he got a big payday for that. Here’s more detail on how the whole thing shook out. Basically, he used the $150MM grant as a bargaining chip to settle for $90MM in return for resigning. This award was only given when he was already under investigation for misconduct - if this was really a reward for creating Android, Page could have handed it to him any time in the other 8.5 years that he worked at Google. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/03/11/technology/google-misconduct-exit-package.amp.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/03/11/tech...