4 ms·
> their actual employer Cognizant You're assuming something that's very much in dispute: The NLRB has concluded otherwise that "Cognizant and Google have codet
by jefftk 3y ago
> their actual employer Cognizant
You're assuming something that's very much in dispute: The NLRB has concluded otherwise that "Cognizant and Google have codetermined the essential terms and conditions of employment [for the YouTube team] and have been joint employers" at all material times.
- bugglebeetle 3y agoIt’s not even really in dispute at this point. Companies can pursue an appeal of an NLRB ruling in federal court, but they generally lose.
- Manuel_D 3y agoNobody disputes that Cognizant is these employees employer. Cognizant hired them, sets their pay, etc. The NLRB is saying that Cognizant's customers are supposed to negotiate with Cognizant's employee union. How exactly Google is supposed to participate in these negotiations when Cognizant is the one that actually has the ability to give employees raises is remains rather unclear.