4 ms·
I would guess in most cases whatever value the employees provided Google has not changed. Not only that, Google's costs are lower not having to provide a space
by lancesells 5y ago
I would guess in most cases whatever value the employees provided Google has not changed. Not only that, Google's costs are lower not having to provide a space for their workers.
Trillion dollar companies with their record quarterly profits cutting their employees pay is nonsense.
- yao420 5y agoExactly these companies are ultra rich and can afford to pay for talent. Google has $160 billion in cash. Im NYC, Google just spent $2.1 billion on a Hudson yards building, in addition to the $2.4 billion for the Chelsea market and $600 million for the milk building across the street two years ago. They have the money, they just might not want to lose their real estate investments value.
- hellisothers 5y agoIs it though? How is lowering an existing employee’s pay who moved away different than laying them off and hiring what you perceive as the exact same skill level of employee in this remote location at a lower pay? Ignoring the whole “well my company already knows I’m a great fit and hiring somebody new is a risk” argument as that is an issue with hiring & firing generally.
- fileeditview 5y agoIt's different because it may not be so easy to find an "equal" replacement. And they could pretty easily get into that situation. If enough developers quit after such a pay cut and find work at other employers that don't play this game then Google may have some trouble. And then you have to ask: "was this worth it?". And my guess would be no.