4 ms·

I have no specific knowledge, but I'd be surprised if there was a general layoff in Engineering. It seems more likely that they are pushing on people they have

by paul 18y ago

I have no specific knowledge, but I'd be surprised if there was a general layoff in Engineering. It seems more likely that they are pushing on people they have classified as "underperforming". I think they also shut down a few remote offices (there was a blog post about this), and anyone who doesn't want to relocate will be out.

jacquesm 18y ago
crises are a great excuse to lay off a bunch of people that were on the low side of 'acceptable' anyway. In 'good' times employers can get quite a backlash from doing this, in 'bad' times nobody complains and those that get to keep their jobs will work harder to avoid being 'axed' because of the crisis. Oldest trick in the book, I've seen this happen at a bank where I worked in the gray past. It would not surprise me one bit if employers would exaggerate the situation in order to push through even more layoffs.
- strlen 18y ago
  This also has the advantage of not being as damaging or negative to the employees being let go as well (no stigma of being fired).
  - alecco 18y ago
    That's meaningless in the context of the problem of trying to get a job in a recession.
    - strlen 18y ago
      I've switched jobs (voluntarily) when the recession just hit (September '08). I still get requests from headhunters, without looking. Part of it has to do with having Yahoo! on my resume -- and I'd imagine having Google would somewhat more impressive. It's just a job someone will find now may not be a job on their terms.
  - strlen 18y ago
    After reading this, I think this comment was in poor thinking: the PIP would carry a stigma -- usually companies let of under performers as a part of a bigger lay off (no stigma attached, as positions have been eliminated -- not the individuals); here it seems to be they're doing the opposite (they're firing people as to avoid publicizing a general lay off). Of course I don't know the true situation, so this is mere speculation.
- neilk 18y ago
  Agreed. I think it is highly unlikely that PIP is being used on a large scale as a real cost-cutting measure. PIP takes months. More likely, they simply are realizing that they have some duds on staff. They've grown tremendously in the past four years, and not all those hires were gems. I have even heard that there are new hiring rules, that engineers now have to have X years of experience doing Y before they can be hired. Which is totally anti-old-school-Google; they would hire the greenest college kid if s/he seemed brilliant and industrious. This suggests that they now believe they have a systemic hiring problem. Or, that brilliance is now not as important as experience. Either way, it suggests that Google is changing.
  - jacquesm 18y ago
    removed.
    - neilk 18y ago
      Your comment now doesn't make sense because I edited out that bit. I couldn't care less about identifying him though... he's not a friend, he's more like a former enemy-co-worker. ;) We struggled to fire him for months and then when we heard he got hired at Google you could have knocked us over with a feather.

by paul 18y ago

jacquesm 18y ago

crises are a great excuse to lay off a bunch of people that were on the low side of 'acceptable' anyway. In 'good' times employers can get quite a backlash from doing this, in 'bad' times nobody complains and those that get to keep their jobs will work harder to avoid being 'axed' because of the crisis. Oldest trick in the book, I've seen this happen at a bank where I worked in the gray past. It would not surprise me one bit if employers would exaggerate the situation in order to push through even more layoffs.

strlen 18y ago
This also has the advantage of not being as damaging or negative to the employees being let go as well (no stigma of being fired).
- alecco 18y ago
  That's meaningless in the context of the problem of trying to get a job in a recession.
  - strlen 18y ago
    I've switched jobs (voluntarily) when the recession just hit (September '08). I still get requests from headhunters, without looking. Part of it has to do with having Yahoo! on my resume -- and I'd imagine having Google would somewhat more impressive. It's just a job someone will find now may not be a job on their terms.
- strlen 18y ago
  After reading this, I think this comment was in poor thinking: the PIP would carry a stigma -- usually companies let of under performers as a part of a bigger lay off (no stigma attached, as positions have been eliminated -- not the individuals); here it seems to be they're doing the opposite (they're firing people as to avoid publicizing a general lay off). Of course I don't know the true situation, so this is mere speculation.
neilk 18y ago
Agreed. I think it is highly unlikely that PIP is being used on a large scale as a real cost-cutting measure. PIP takes months. More likely, they simply are realizing that they have some duds on staff. They've grown tremendously in the past four years, and not all those hires were gems. I have even heard that there are new hiring rules, that engineers now have to have X years of experience doing Y before they can be hired. Which is totally anti-old-school-Google; they would hire the greenest college kid if s/he seemed brilliant and industrious. This suggests that they now believe they have a systemic hiring problem. Or, that brilliance is now not as important as experience. Either way, it suggests that Google is changing.
- jacquesm 18y ago
  removed.
  - neilk 18y ago
    Your comment now doesn't make sense because I edited out that bit. I couldn't care less about identifying him though... he's not a friend, he's more like a former enemy-co-worker. ;) We struggled to fire him for months and then when we heard he got hired at Google you could have knocked us over with a feather.