4 ms·

Why does it have to be different? If under representation/abuse is prevalent in an industry nothing should be done about it?

giantg2 6y ago
What "under representation/abuse"? Contractors typically get paid a higher rate so they can pay for their own benefits.
- John23832 6y ago
  Again, you’re asking things you could easily read in the article.
  - giantg2 6y ago
    Perhaps I read the article and don't agree with your assessment.
    - joshuamorton 6y ago
      "Contractor" is a bit of a misnomer in the case of Google (and other tech companies). You have FTEs and "TVC"s, which is a large group of non-Google employees (of which contractors, the "C" is by far the smallest). The largest are "V", the Vendors. Employees of third party companies contracted to Google to do stuff. Vendors do all kinds of things: clean, cook, manual QA work where necessary, drive cars, etc. The vast majority of the TVCs Google works with are Vendors, and most of them are paid much, much less than tech employees, because they aren't tech employees. But there are a variety of other requirements around working with vendors. The ability to give them gifts, recognition, and treat them like human people is limited by labor law, as if you start to treat them too much like everyone else at the office, they suddenly turn into Employees, despite being employed by a Vendor company, and Google really doesn't want this to happen.
      - giantg2 6y ago
        Yeah, I'd like to see the labor laws change. Some of the restrictions seem stupid. Although I also see how it was originally intended to prevent companies from keeping contractors like regular longterm employees but without benefits. Of course, that's not much different from the current situation. Our company doesn't include contractors or consultants (both through vendors, never direct, like even typical contractors are brought in through a place like TCS) in our group activities. They also, have term limits of 3 years or less.

giantg2 6y ago

What "under representation/abuse"? Contractors typically get paid a higher rate so they can pay for their own benefits.

John23832 6y ago
Again, you’re asking things you could easily read in the article.
- giantg2 6y ago
  Perhaps I read the article and don't agree with your assessment.
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    "Contractor" is a bit of a misnomer in the case of Google (and other tech companies). You have FTEs and "TVC"s, which is a large group of non-Google employees (of which contractors, the "C" is by far the smallest). The largest are "V", the Vendors. Employees of third party companies contracted to Google to do stuff. Vendors do all kinds of things: clean, cook, manual QA work where necessary, drive cars, etc. The vast majority of the TVCs Google works with are Vendors, and most of them are paid much, much less than tech employees, because they aren't tech employees. But there are a variety of other requirements around working with vendors. The ability to give them gifts, recognition, and treat them like human people is limited by labor law, as if you start to treat them too much like everyone else at the office, they suddenly turn into Employees, despite being employed by a Vendor company, and Google really doesn't want this to happen.
    - giantg2 6y ago
      Yeah, I'd like to see the labor laws change. Some of the restrictions seem stupid. Although I also see how it was originally intended to prevent companies from keeping contractors like regular longterm employees but without benefits. Of course, that's not much different from the current situation. Our company doesn't include contractors or consultants (both through vendors, never direct, like even typical contractors are brought in through a place like TCS) in our group activities. They also, have term limits of 3 years or less.