|
SolTerrasa posted:There's an employee program by which you can take 6 months off unpaid, and just come back when you're done, guaranteed. The average salary at Google is like 5 times the median American household income. You can work a few years and then just not work for 6 months, if you want, and still make on average $200k+. It's a really sweet deal, and the fact that it could have been a sweeter deal if some shady backroom poo poo hadn't happened doesn't change that, as is, it's a loving great job for people who value time off more than compensation. otoh i work a software job and they would never, ever call me at home outside of my work hours or once i've ht 40 hours for the week unless something is actually on fire
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 16:16 |
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:otoh i work a software job and they would never, ever call me at home outside of my work hours or once i've ht 40 hours for the week unless something is actually on fire And where have you heard that this is different at google?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:And where have you heard that this is different at google? its pretty common for large employers to expect more than 40+ hours, depending on the team or department or project. this is one of the reasons to place an employee on salary compensation rather than hourly
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2016 22:38
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:its pretty common for large employers to expect more than 40+ hours, depending on the team or department or project. this is one of the reasons to place an employee on salary compensation rather than hourly It sounds like you don't have much personal experience in the matter. As an employee of a "large employer" I put in my 40 and go home. I also don't have to worry about stuff like making up time for doctors appointments or being late slightly because of a bad commute.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:otoh i work a software job and they would never, ever call me at home outside of my work hours or once i've ht 40 hours for the week unless something is actually on fire Hey, it's great that you've got a deal that works for you. Being able to disconnect / take time off is important, especially in software where "putting in the hours" is sometimes valued above actual skill and performance. I'm not trying to be a dick, and the problems you describe are real at most of the lovely startups I've seen, and I'm sure at lots of huge companies too. That said, at Google you get paid extra for any day that they could call you in after hours, regardless of whether they do, as long as you meet some SLA requirements. And, if you have an oncall-focused job (SRE), you can take that extra payment in time off, rather than money (most Google employees have enough money and would rather take the time off). The payment is pretty high, too, it goes up to 66% salary (or 2/3 a day off per day) for very short SLA services, the kind where you have to be within a mile or so of your computer / WiFi the whole time you're on call.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:its pretty common for large employers to expect more than 40+ hours, depending on the team or department or project. this is one of the reasons to place an employee on salary compensation rather than hourly Are you sure you're not thinking of Amazon? Google is kinda famous for not doing all this crap.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
Just in general (not tech) I'd say it's common to expect the possibility of working >40 hours in a week for salaried employees, but not that it would be a regular thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
Cheesus posted:If you move between companies. It's kind of a defacto standard for getting a raise. This might be true for startups but I don't think it's true for the large players. Google definitely gives out regular >10% raises; I know this because my compensation has increased by at least that much for the last many years.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Just in general (not tech) I'd say it's common to expect the possibility of working >40 hours in a week for salaried employees, but not that it would be a regular thing. Not really; an absolute shitload of companies have been squeezing salaried employees for more and more hours. Some places were coming under fire for paying employees just enough (this is why it was a huge deal that Obama pushed through measures to like double the number) that they could be "salaried - nonexempt" then putting them through the wringer with 80 hours a week. You'd be an "assistant manager" making $27K and pretty much living on the job. The food service world was notorious for this. In the case of Google's "hey let's get people to stay here a lot" things, well...I like programming more than I like taking time out to get an oil change so hey if I can take care of all that life poo poo right there I'd be OK with working some extra hours. Especially with their "spend some of your time on your own projects" policy. From what I've heard their expectations are pretty high but they're pretty far from the worst employer. Granted they also seem to want people who live and breathe technology and would pull 60 hour weeks even if nobody was paying them to.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Evil Robot posted:This might be true for startups but I don't think it's true for the large players. Google definitely gives out regular >10% raises; I know this because my compensation has increased by at least that much for the last many years. Another irritating aspect is the business that considers itself perpetually a startup. Like 10 or 15 years or even more and expects employees to treat it accordingly (e.g., poor/mediocre compensation, expected work beyond 40 hours, etc).
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 00:45
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Does Costco ensure that its suppliers pay their folks well? I only know of one company that requires minimum compensation and benefits for the employees of its service vendors, and it's not them. I am sorry, nation-wide, that you can no longer get a lifetime job as a cleaner at Big Company X, with a pension and people who recognize you and time off and health benefits. I don't think contracting out has been a good thing for most low-skilled contractors. It's not "set your own hours", it's "work exactly like an employee, except with out the legal protections offered to employees".
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:Yes, but Google contracts out cleaning and gardening and stuff, and they've been picketed for not hiring contractors that paid a living wage. (I don't know if the picketers were justified or not; I just know they were there.) There is a difference between "I won't buy any products unless employees are paid minimum wage" and "I won't contract labor unless the laborers get a living wage." Google's bus drivers (operated by a contractor called Loop) just recently unionized and up to that point were working schedules that forced employees to sleep in the parking lot between shifts overnight. They made less than half of what transit agencies like Sam trans, AC transit, VTA, and Muni paid to do similar work. They also used to get box lunches along with Google employees, but allegedly one guy was taking extras for his family so the companies contracted by Google are now forbidden from getting the box lunches. Obviously their prerogative but kind of shifty to punish everybody. I've heard similar stories about Stanford employees that don't hold tenure (Like the food service employees). ToxicSlurpee posted:Not really; an absolute shitload of companies have been squeezing salaried employees for more and more hours. Some places were coming under fire for paying employees just enough (this is why it was a huge deal that Obama pushed through measures to like double the number) that they could be "salaried - nonexempt" then putting them through the wringer with 80 hours a week. You'd be an "assistant manager" making $27K and pretty much living on the job. The food service world was notorious for this.  about people that prefer to be salaried when more often than not they are making far less per hour by being salary exempt than an hourly employee would make. I guess some people are workaholics but the older I get the more valuable time AWAY from work becomes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:They also used to get box lunches along with Google employees, but allegedly one guy was taking extras for his family so the companies contracted by Google are now forbidden from getting the box lunches. When I was at FB there was a sign in one of the kitchens that said "not for $constructionco worker use." I and others complained about it, and it turned out that it was $constructionco's policy and not FB's. Many theories flew around about why, I never found out for sure. The on-campus benefits were great because instead of spending 90 mins of my weekend to get my hair cut, f.e., I could spend 30 mins of my work day. I got paid to get a boring business cut every 6 weeks; similarly getting my teeth cleaned, flu shots, dropping off laundry, car wash. That poo poo was super popular with new parents, and they weren't pulling 70 hour weeks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
The thing with places like Google, Facebook, and Valve is that they're using the carrot and not the stick. They obviously want you to work long hours but let's be honest; one of the reasons that you can't is because of stuff like, you know, laundry, dentist appointments, car bullshit...that crap. So they're taking care of it for you. Suddenly you have more time and less stress! Spending more time at work seems less awful when there's a bunch of perks and happy people you like and you find that you want to be there. Other companies are doing poo poo like culling the ranks every year (hello, Amazon!) or paying you a salary and then giving bad reviews to people who would like to have life other than their job, thanks. Some places just hand you so much poo poo on your list of poo poo to do that you can't not work absurd hours. Seems that the carrot is far more effective, judging from what I've been hearing. That or places whose salaries are mediocre but are totally OK with it being "not my loving problem o'clock" when you've put in your 8 hours.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Not really; an absolute shitload of companies have been squeezing salaried employees for more and more hours. Some places were coming under fire for paying employees just enough (this is why it was a huge deal that Obama pushed through measures to like double the number) that they could be "salaried - nonexempt" then putting them through the wringer with 80 hours a week. You'd be an "assistant manager" making $27K and pretty much living on the job. The food service world was notorious for this. That's a different issue, which is converting (effectively) hourly employees to salaried to avoid overtime payments.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Other companies are doing poo poo like culling the ranks every year (hello, Amazon!) or paying you a salary and then giving bad reviews to people who would like to have life other than their job, thanks. Some places just hand you so much poo poo on your list of poo poo to do that you can't not work absurd hours.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
When I think of stack ranking I think of Enron.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
I thought Apple was known for paying slightly below market salaries since they think the privilege of working for Apple is worth the pay cut.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:When I think of stack ranking I think of Enron. I think it's originally from GM, but I may be misremembering. Anyway, it's a great way to drive people to stab one another in the front and back.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:I thought Apple was known for paying slightly below market salaries since they think the privilege of working for Apple is worth the pay cut. this is tesla's hiring philosophy except that they sell it as "wanting the true believers"
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
Noam Chomsky posted:Because it sets the precedent that a billionaire can essentially close down a media organization for reporting things they don't like. Gawker did some pretty good reporting on the nefarious persons we're discussing in this very thread. Also, plenty of organizations are still in business who have published private pornographic media, organizations who haven't made an enemy of Peter Thiel. what? no it doesn't it sets the precedent that a billionaire can close a media organization down for a) publishing sex tapes without permission, and b) making absolute gigantic loving horse's asses of themselves in a court of law (to the point of defending child pornography) like, Thiel or no Thiel, if Hogan had just suddenly won the lottery one day and funded it that way, Gawker would have still lost because they hosed up bad
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
Cheesus posted:Hence my qualifier "rare" for the company that does any kind of proactive increase in salary or benefits on a regular schedule. You keep saying this but haven't named a single company. You guys realize tech is a candidate's market right now right? This is why zuck and others are pushing so hard for H1B reform, to increase supply. Anyone not giving raises would very quickly have trouble attracting talent. It really does not happen very often.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
pr0zac posted:You keep saying this but haven't named a single company. That's pretty much the entirety of why programmers are doing well right now; everybody needs software and the demand for programmers exceeds the demand. You can bet your rear end that there are forces in motion to make hiring programmers cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:That's pretty much the entirety of why programmers are doing well right now; everybody needs software and the demand for programmers exceeds the demand. You can bet your rear end that there are forces in motion to make hiring programmers cheaper. So far it's just been cheaper and easier to establish satellite offices in other states.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:what? no it doesn't You really don't see the issue with requiring asking permission before writing about a public figure? Also, the courts ruled the Hulk Hogan sex tape was, shudder, newsworthy so you can't say it wasn't.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Just in general (not tech) I'd say it's common to expect the possibility of working >40 hours in a week for salaried employees, but not that it would be a regular thing. As a regular thing was what was traditionally expected of White Collar salaried employees.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:That's pretty much the entirety of why programmers are doing well right now; everybody needs software and the demand for programmers exceeds the demand. You can bet your rear end that there are forces in motion to make hiring programmers cheaper. If they were truly desperate these companies would not wait months between candidate contacts and after interviews require multiple committees to sign off on each employment offer. duz posted:You really don't see the issue with requiring asking permission before writing about a public figure? A judge did not issue a preliminary injunction because of that. A jury found otherwise. hobbesmaster fucked around with this message at 04:32 on Sep 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:I thought Apple was known for paying slightly below market salaries since they think the privilege of working for Apple is worth the pay cut. As a general career tip: prefer non-prestigious companies, unless the reason they're prestigious is their compensation and working conditions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 04:44
|
|
|
Noam Chomsky posted:Because it sets the precedent that a billionaire can essentially close down a media organization for reporting things they don't like. Gawker did some pretty good reporting on the nefarious persons we're discussing in this very thread. Also, plenty of organizations are still in business who have published private pornographic media, organizations who haven't made an enemy of Peter Thiel. They published stolen porn of a guy, and bragged about not following a court order telling them to take it down. At the same time, they pretended to care about privacy when it came to stolen photos of women. The gawker downfall is not about a rich man taking down information he doesn't like. It's about a rich man helping someone legitimately sue a lovely rag for what they did. What bothers you are the politics of the financiers of the lawsuit, we get it, but the doesn't change the suit was legitimate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 05:38
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:If they were truly desperate these companies would not wait months between candidate contacts and after interviews require multiple committees to sign off on each employment offer. I'm not even talking about Google here but the myriad of startups who insist on cargo culting Google's hiring practices. A gauntlet of whiteboard interviews makes sense if you are one of the world's most desirable companies and actually need the skills tested in whiteboard interviews, not so much if you are a startup with a bog standard CRUD web app. You also see the dreaded "cultural fit" interview gauntlet a lot after you make it past the above, which is often a stalking horse for discrimination.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 07:01
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:They published stolen porn of a guy, and bragged about not following a court order telling them to take it down. At the same time, they pretended to care about privacy when it came to stolen photos of women. didn't the gawker people also give some smug sarcastic testimony to the judge yeah that's right it looks like the editor-in-chief did exactly that lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 08:01
|
|
|
Gawker deserved everything that came their way in that trail.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
Otoh Univision took down some articles that weren't stolen sex tapes because they are afraid of being sued, so that definitely seems like a chilling effect on journalism to me Also why do we care so much about what people at Facebook or Google make when their experiences aren't representative of working for a tech company in general, and working for a tech company in general isn't representative of jobs in the wider economy
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 12:48
|
|
|
pr0zac posted:You keep saying this but haven't named a single company.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 13:00
|
|
|
rscott posted:Otoh Univision took down some articles that weren't stolen sex tapes because they are afraid of being sued, so that definitely seems like a chilling effect on journalism to me Gawker was already being sued over those articles though. And now gawker has no money so those lawsuits will disappear.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:They published stolen porn of a guy, and bragged about not following a court order telling them to take it down. No they didn't. That court order was struck down by the appeals court almost immediately for being wildly unconstitutional. H.P. Hovercraft posted:didn't the gawker people also give some smug sarcastic testimony to the judge No, that was a former editor who was still pissed about being fired by Gawker.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 15:07
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:No they didn't. That court order was struck down by the appeals court almost immediately for being wildly unconstitutional. They didn't wait for the Appeals Court to rule. They just did what they wanted, arguing free speech considerations over a stolen porn video of a wrestler. http://gawker.com/a-judge-told-us-to-take-down-our-hulk-hogan-sex-tape-po-481328088
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 15:14
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:If they were truly desperate these companies would not wait months between candidate contacts and after interviews require multiple committees to sign off on each employment offer. They're not ultra super desperate but do still have a shortage unless you're like Google. Like was said Google has insane hiring practices but that's because their pay and bennies are absurd; they offer enough that they can snag the best. People are falling over themselves to work there. In general though there is a shortage of programmers. Part of the problem is people cargo culting Google but another part is that even inexperienced programmers that aren't all that great still aren't cheap. Nobody wants to get stuck paying a dumbass who can't do the job $70k a year. Granted a lot of places also want to pay less than that but refuse to develop a noob's talents. Good programmers are damned expensive and developing software isn't cheap.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:No they didn't. That court order was struck down by the appeals court almost immediately for being wildly unconstitutional. he was one of the defendants that they thought this was a good idea is insane
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 16:16 |
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:he was one of the defendants this is a true lol @ millenials moment "do not talk about child porn in a deposition or on the witness stand unless you are directly charged with child porn offenses"
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 18:30
|
|