3 ms·

These outside companies had minimal oversight from Google, by design. Could this be so that the google corporate toadies could bid out the lowest possible pri

These outside companies had minimal oversight from Google, by design. Could this be so that the google corporate toadies could bid out the lowest possible price, yet remain isolated from the predictably unethical, shoddy, or even illegal practices of the cut-throat priced contracting companies? It just seems strange that you’re lauding google HR, when your description suggests google was complicit, if not directly responsible, for the whole setup.

KingMachiavelli 5y ago
For a large company it often makes little sense to directly hire temp employees and/or vet contractors. The fact that a cottage industry of less than law abiding contracting agencies provide services to Google is more an issue of CA's employee protection laws than Google's responsibility. Consider the current/default rate of wage theft via salary employees not paid for overtime despite being eligible; it's rampant in the SE industry because it's logistically easier to pay someone 10% more than to keep track of occasional overtime. Therefore whenever a large company contracts something out to a smaller company, you should immediate expect more shady practices. My point is that Google's only role in this case is making something unknown... known - plenty of small shops unrelated to FAANGs break the same rules.
Viliam1234 5y ago
The mechanism of distancing yourself from crime is explained here: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/9fB4gvoooNYa4t56S/power-buys-you-distance-from-the-crime https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/9fB4gvoooNYa4t56S/power-buys...
itsdrewmiller 5y ago
For contractors to avoid classification as employees you need to be pretty hands off - the more you tell them how to do their jobs the more likely they are to be classified as employees if such a question arises. I don’t think immediately assuming bad faith is fair here (or there or anywhere really).

KingMachiavelli 5y ago

For a large company it often makes little sense to directly hire temp employees and/or vet contractors. The fact that a cottage industry of less than law abiding contracting agencies provide services to Google is more an issue of CA's employee protection laws than Google's responsibility. Consider the current/default rate of wage theft via salary employees not paid for overtime despite being eligible; it's rampant in the SE industry because it's logistically easier to pay someone 10% more than to keep track of occasional overtime. Therefore whenever a large company contracts something out to a smaller company, you should immediate expect more shady practices. My point is that Google's only role in this case is making something unknown... known - plenty of small shops unrelated to FAANGs break the same rules.

Viliam1234 5y ago

The mechanism of distancing yourself from crime is explained here: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/9fB4gvoooNYa4t56S/power-buys-you-distance-from-the-crime https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/9fB4gvoooNYa4t56S/power-buys...

itsdrewmiller 5y ago

For contractors to avoid classification as employees you need to be pretty hands off - the more you tell them how to do their jobs the more likely they are to be classified as employees if such a question arises. I don’t think immediately assuming bad faith is fair here (or there or anywhere really).