3 ms·
Note - that this sort of thing usually lasts while a company is profitable. Once things get tight (if they do), then everything is back on the table, and Secur
by ghshephard 12y ago
Note - that this sort of thing usually lasts while a company is profitable. Once things get tight (if they do), then everything is back on the table, and Security Guards, Cleaners, Kitchen Staff, Groundskeepers - basically anybody who doesn't have proprietary knowledge, training, or skills is replaced with a contractor.
I remember when my University (SFU) fired all their cleaning staff - some of whom had been working their for 20+ years and replaced them with contractors (who (ironically?) actually did a much better job for a lot less money) - students went on a mini strike, but, at the same time, the University was being forced to raise tuition to cover the bills - so they were trying to find every way they could save money possible.
- atmosx 12y agoSure, but this is all-mighty Google. I don't see any cash issues in the mid (or long for the matter) term future.
- rodly 12y agoThis isn't always the case. Zappos had always hired people to prepare breakfast and dinner and then flipped and used a contractor for food prep and service when they moved to their new HQ in downtown Las Vegas. Zappos is definitely not tight on money and is very well run (from what I could tell). Perhaps they're just an outlier though.
- walshemj 12y agoIt's a sign that hr and accountants have taken over and the tail is wagging the dog
- RyJones 12y agoIt's interesting to me that Google is doing this. I was at Microsoft when they decided receptionists weren't a core competency they wanted. They kept tightening up when was - as an STE at the time, you could see that role was not going to make the cut. I was at MSN as an SDET when the last STEs were laid off and rehired as contractors. I was back at Microsoft when they decided SDETs weren't core; we were all converted to SDEs or hired back as STE contractors.
- theshrike79 12y agoIt all depends on the contract for the cleaning staff. Around here the university did the opposite, they ended all cleaning contracts and hired their own staff with better pay. Costs went down, quality went up. The problem was that due to idiotic (EU?) competition laws the maximum length for a cleaning contract was 2 years with a 1 year extension. So the firms worked kinda OK for the first 2 years and fucked around for the extension year since they wouldn't get renewed anyway. Quality went to shit, no one did the basic work of re-waxing the floors "the next contractor will do it" etc.