4 ms·

It's basically "Big Tech Bashing" at this point. She wasn't working for Google, she was working for a contractor. Go to a different datacenter and it will be s

It's basically "Big Tech Bashing" at this point. She wasn't working for Google, she was working for a contractor. Go to a different datacenter and it will be staffed by a different (local) contractor. Same thing for most of the building's maintenance staff. What makes it news-worthy is that the owner of that particular server-rack was a high-profile company. Had the same thing happened at a datacenter owned by a bank, nobody would have reported on it.

joshuamorton 6y ago
You understand that most Google DCs are owned and operated by google, and serve only google, right? So like even at best this is "Google contracted some dc operations to a company that violated labor relations law." The more newsworthy part is that she was able to get recourse.
- pb7 6y ago
  If you get a guy to come replace your roof, it's not really your problem that his employer didn't give him a water bottle, now is it?
  - buryat 6y ago
    being a good client I would still offer them water/soft drink regardless.
  - pmiller2 6y ago
    Yeah, it kinda is, unless you're a total shitbag with no empathy.
  - ALittleLight 6y ago
    Sure, but if I own a house construction company and hire a contractor to do the roofs because I want to keep roof costs down at all costs I am responsible for the low salaries and poor conditions of my roof contractors.
  - sjg007 6y ago
    If the contractor doesn't pay the subcontractor, you as the homeowner are liable.
- GauntletWizard 6y ago
  It wasn't long ago that Google directly employed most of their datacenter techs. I know a couple guys who worked their way up from server monkey to SRE. It's sad to hear that that pathway seems closed off.
chris11 6y ago
Google was involved in her employment. The Alphabet Worker's Union filed a complaint against both Google and Modis. There's no reason to assume that only one company was involved, who was responsible can be decided by the NLRB.

joshuamorton 6y ago

You understand that most Google DCs are owned and operated by google, and serve only google, right? So like even at best this is "Google contracted some dc operations to a company that violated labor relations law." The more newsworthy part is that she was able to get recourse.

pb7 6y ago
If you get a guy to come replace your roof, it's not really your problem that his employer didn't give him a water bottle, now is it?
- buryat 6y ago
  being a good client I would still offer them water/soft drink regardless.
- pmiller2 6y ago
  Yeah, it kinda is, unless you're a total shitbag with no empathy.
- ALittleLight 6y ago
  Sure, but if I own a house construction company and hire a contractor to do the roofs because I want to keep roof costs down at all costs I am responsible for the low salaries and poor conditions of my roof contractors.
- sjg007 6y ago
  If the contractor doesn't pay the subcontractor, you as the homeowner are liable.
GauntletWizard 6y ago
It wasn't long ago that Google directly employed most of their datacenter techs. I know a couple guys who worked their way up from server monkey to SRE. It's sad to hear that that pathway seems closed off.

chris11 6y ago

Google was involved in her employment. The Alphabet Worker's Union filed a complaint against both Google and Modis. There's no reason to assume that only one company was involved, who was responsible can be decided by the NLRB.