3 ms·

This does not change the fact that the "heat" he is taking had exactly zero consequences for him. So "I take full responsibility" is an empty platitude that mea

This does not change the fact that the "heat" he is taking had exactly zero consequences for him. So "I take full responsibility" is an empty platitude that means basically nothing.

m000 3y ago
That's not true. I'm sure he was more sweaty than usual, laughing on his way to the bank. /s
- pdimitar 3y ago
  And he practically worked an entire month's hours by having to pretend that he cares! Obviously he busted his arse working that day!
jodrellblank 3y ago
2021 added 40% revenue growth and $36Bn in net profit to Alphabet in one year. - https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/24/google_exec_bonuses_cut/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/24/google_exec_bonuses_c... That seems like something the board/shareholders/market would reward him for, not punish him for. Who would punish him and why for the inhumanity of firing lots of people? Not the board, not the California state government, not the Federal government. Maybe that would be a role for an employee's union?
- pdimitar 3y ago
  Sure, what you say is not wrong, the financial incentives are all wrong and reward being an inhuman. That being said, none of what you said justifies his empty "I take full responsibility" statement. It's hollow and it achieves nothing. Well, nothing good related to those fired that is.
  - scarface74 3y ago
    What were the financial incentives of people taking a job at Google? They wanted to get paid top of market compensation for their labor and they did while they were working there. What did the employees do with their additional compensation? Did they save it? Are they trying to use the fact they worked for Google to increase their network? At what point is it the employee’s responsibility to assume that no job is permanent?
    - tombert 3y ago
      What you're saying isn't contradictory to criticizing the CEO. Yes, a job is a business transaction and employees should be aware of that. I don't think anyone here disputes it. I certainly do not. That has literally no bearing on the fact at all on whether or not the CEO claiming that he's taking "full responsibility" is an empty platitude. No one is accusing Google of slave labor here, but that's the claim you're defending. ETA: Whether or not the employees should be viewing working for Google as transactional, it's still a frustrating pain in the ass to be fired from a job. They have to spend some amount of time with no income. They have to go through an annoying interview process of people masturbating to whiteboard problems. Their next job might not pay as well. If they weren't at Google very long (<1 year) then that's still going to look bad on a resume. It's a frustrating experience. No one is claiming that the CEO of Google should go to jail or anything, but if he's firing 12,000 people because of his bad decisions, him claiming that taking "full responsibility" is just an empty statement and it's frustrating.
      - scarface_74 3y ago
        And every CEO makes empty statements. Do you also believe the “we are family” bullshit? The DI&E initiatives? Did you believe the “Do no evil” motto they use to have? Why would I believe anything my CEO says in that regard who I am 7 levels removed from and I’m one of only 1 million+ employees at the 2nd largest employer in the US? I know I’m just a number. > Their next job might not pay as well As hinted above, I also work for BigTech, so I’m in no way bitter about their income. But how large of a fiddle should I be playing for someone who might not make $300K - $400K and might have to sully themselves and be a corporate dev making “only” $150-$170K like most of the 2.7 million devs in the US (as I did most of my long career)
- tombert 3y ago
  Shouldn't he only be rewarded if something he did actually led to growth? Lots of companies grew like crazy in 2021, as mentioned in the parent article. Moreover, if we're going to reward this individual when times are good purely for being in charge at the right time, then shouldn't it go both ways? Shouldn't we punish him when things are going bad, for example the tail end of 2022? I'm not a business person, it just seems like if I were an investor with Google [1] then that's how I'd view it. [1] I don't own any Google stock directly, but I suppose indirectly I own some via ETFs and an index fund. ETA: The reason I mention this is that I don't want to "punish him for firing lots of people", but because the people that were fired were the only ones punished for his bad leadership.

This does not change the fact that the "heat" he is taking had exactly zero consequences for him. So "I take full responsibility" is an empty platitude that means basically nothing.

m000 3y ago

That's not true. I'm sure he was more sweaty than usual, laughing on his way to the bank. /s

pdimitar 3y ago
And he practically worked an entire month's hours by having to pretend that he cares! Obviously he busted his arse working that day!

jodrellblank 3y ago

2021 added 40% revenue growth and $36Bn in net profit to Alphabet in one year. - https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/24/google_exec_bonuses_cut/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/24/google_exec_bonuses_c... That seems like something the board/shareholders/market would reward him for, not punish him for. Who would punish him and why for the inhumanity of firing lots of people? Not the board, not the California state government, not the Federal government. Maybe that would be a role for an employee's union?

pdimitar 3y ago
Sure, what you say is not wrong, the financial incentives are all wrong and reward being an inhuman. That being said, none of what you said justifies his empty "I take full responsibility" statement. It's hollow and it achieves nothing. Well, nothing good related to those fired that is.
- scarface74 3y ago
  What were the financial incentives of people taking a job at Google? They wanted to get paid top of market compensation for their labor and they did while they were working there. What did the employees do with their additional compensation? Did they save it? Are they trying to use the fact they worked for Google to increase their network? At what point is it the employee’s responsibility to assume that no job is permanent?
  - tombert 3y ago
    What you're saying isn't contradictory to criticizing the CEO. Yes, a job is a business transaction and employees should be aware of that. I don't think anyone here disputes it. I certainly do not. That has literally no bearing on the fact at all on whether or not the CEO claiming that he's taking "full responsibility" is an empty platitude. No one is accusing Google of slave labor here, but that's the claim you're defending. ETA: Whether or not the employees should be viewing working for Google as transactional, it's still a frustrating pain in the ass to be fired from a job. They have to spend some amount of time with no income. They have to go through an annoying interview process of people masturbating to whiteboard problems. Their next job might not pay as well. If they weren't at Google very long (<1 year) then that's still going to look bad on a resume. It's a frustrating experience. No one is claiming that the CEO of Google should go to jail or anything, but if he's firing 12,000 people because of his bad decisions, him claiming that taking "full responsibility" is just an empty statement and it's frustrating.
    - scarface_74 3y ago
      And every CEO makes empty statements. Do you also believe the “we are family” bullshit? The DI&E initiatives? Did you believe the “Do no evil” motto they use to have? Why would I believe anything my CEO says in that regard who I am 7 levels removed from and I’m one of only 1 million+ employees at the 2nd largest employer in the US? I know I’m just a number. > Their next job might not pay as well As hinted above, I also work for BigTech, so I’m in no way bitter about their income. But how large of a fiddle should I be playing for someone who might not make $300K - $400K and might have to sully themselves and be a corporate dev making “only” $150-$170K like most of the 2.7 million devs in the US (as I did most of my long career)
tombert 3y ago
Shouldn't he only be rewarded if something he did actually led to growth? Lots of companies grew like crazy in 2021, as mentioned in the parent article. Moreover, if we're going to reward this individual when times are good purely for being in charge at the right time, then shouldn't it go both ways? Shouldn't we punish him when things are going bad, for example the tail end of 2022? I'm not a business person, it just seems like if I were an investor with Google [1] then that's how I'd view it. [1] I don't own any Google stock directly, but I suppose indirectly I own some via ETFs and an index fund. ETA: The reason I mention this is that I don't want to "punish him for firing lots of people", but because the people that were fired were the only ones punished for his bad leadership.