this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
302 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

34904 readers
334 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
all 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] dingus@lemmy.ml 76 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Google is sitting on the "but they're contractors!" angle because it makes it easier for them.

Why?

Because once the union does collective bargaining with their actual employer, Cognizant, the company will have almost no recourse but to increase fees to Google for the contract work.

Once this happens, Google just says "Oops, you're shit out of luck" and then hires a whole new company of contracted workers for the same work, for cheaper.

Google purposefully uses this type of structure to ensure they never have to pay more, even when collective bargaining with unions does happen. Because then they can just shitcan the whole company and claim costs were too high. They certainly won't break their contract, but you can bet your ass when time comes to renew it, Google will have found someone new to take their place.

[–] Deconceptualist@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is exactly how it works. I've seen the same thing go down with another major Google contractor (fortunately as an outsider).

[–] Got_Bent@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

I really didn't think we would ever see a return to the days of the robber barons. Now I think that era was but an open mic amateur hour opening for the headliner that's coming.

[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Google has never been quick to learn lessons, especially when it comes to its workers.

[–] drwho@beehaw.org 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

When it comes to their workers, the Big G does learn its lessons. That's why it's so able to keep screwing them over; they reason from the standpoint of "how do I make this not affect me?"

[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Must be why it keeps coming back to bite them in the ass

Google’s tech union crossed the picket line when their NYC building was getting asbestos removed by scabs. They refused to help the custodial union. They suck, too.

[–] Haus@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago

Once the body of that first billionaire hits the floor, they're gonna start dropping like flies.

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

A Google spokesperson told Motherboard in a statement at the time of the unionization that it had “no objection to these Cognizant workers electing to form a union,” but that it would not bargain with them. “We are not a joint employer as we simply do not control their employment terms or working conditions—this matter is between the workers and their employer, Cognizant,” the spokesperson said.

NLRB seems to disagree. This will be an interesting case, I suspect ...

[–] skellener@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can they automatically go union then? I thought there’s a new law about that.

[–] DigitalJacobin@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago

is this what you're referring to?

The U.S. National Labor Relations Board on Friday resurrected key elements of a policy it eliminated more than 50 years ago requiring businesses that commit labor law violations to bargain with unions without holding formal elections.

[–] donuts@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What they should really do is pay musicians more.

[–] interolivary@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

Pay the execs more, you say? Sure thing!