Google Memo On Cost Cuts Sparks Heated Debate Inside Company (bloomberg.com) 117
"A 2016 document proposing cost cuts at Alphabet's Google, including fewer promotions and bonuses, sparked heated debate when it was shared inside the technology company for the first time this week," reports Bloomberg, citing people familiar with the matter. "At a companywide townhall meeting on Thursday, Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai fielded questions about the proposals, some of which have been implemented." From the report: The ideas were in a 2016 slide deck drafted by the company's human resources department from a brainstorming session. The document, portions of which were read to Bloomberg News, was circulated in recent days by employees via Google's internal communications systems. It detailed proposed changes to employee compensation, benefits and perks. The document also discussed how the proposals could be best presented to employees to minimize frustration, according to one of the people. That caused the most anger among some staff after the document was circulated, said this person.
Perhaps the most significant change in the proposal called for trimming the rate of promotions. Each year, a certain number of employees are up for promotions based on performance and other metrics. The slide deck suggested reducing this by 2 percentage points. The document said this could be rolled out without upsetting staff because workers didn't know what the existing rate was, so wouldn't notice if it declined. The brainstorming deck also proposed reducing wage bumps when workers get promoted. It also suggested changing Google's approach to "spot bonuses," sums that managers can award at any time of year. Managers receive emails reminding them to dispense this money. The slide deck proposed ending the emails, arguing that few people would notice. The proposal also included converting holiday gifts to staff into charitable donations -- something Google did at the end of 2016. Google confirmed the veracity of the 2016 document, although it was never presented to the company's top management.
Perhaps the most significant change in the proposal called for trimming the rate of promotions. Each year, a certain number of employees are up for promotions based on performance and other metrics. The slide deck suggested reducing this by 2 percentage points. The document said this could be rolled out without upsetting staff because workers didn't know what the existing rate was, so wouldn't notice if it declined. The brainstorming deck also proposed reducing wage bumps when workers get promoted. It also suggested changing Google's approach to "spot bonuses," sums that managers can award at any time of year. Managers receive emails reminding them to dispense this money. The slide deck proposed ending the emails, arguing that few people would notice. The proposal also included converting holiday gifts to staff into charitable donations -- something Google did at the end of 2016. Google confirmed the veracity of the 2016 document, although it was never presented to the company's top management.
Re:Never presented to the top management (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Never presented to the top management (Score:4, Interesting)
That's what they say. Yet some of it was implemented. That's a little... coincidental.
This was probably the first draft; what was actually presented to management was much, much worse.
Waiting on the first large google layoff (Score:1)
Google has made public moves on cost cutting which cutting the ad revenue sharing for web and youtube as the most obvious.
Google is big and at 25 years old is well past middle age for a tech company.
Innovation, new products, or caretaker of existing products?
Which new google product launches of the last 4 years have done well or contribute more than 3% of google's annual operating revenue?
Waiting on the first bad earnings quarter and the large layoffs or the total employee headcount to decrease for multiple
I try to present the only best ideas to management (Score:4, Insightful)
If I brainstorm a bunch of ideas with co-workers, I try to present the best ideas to management, rather than every idea that came up. Sometimes a hybrid of multiple different ideas from the brainstorming session sounds better than the original ideas, or even inverting the idea.
It's entirely possible that some of the ideas were presented to top management without this particular document being presented.
Is this a surprise? (Score:1)
1. Anyone working for Google deserves what they get. We all know what Google is and software is just a means to spy. If you have no issue with it, fuck you.
2. This sort of thing is what eventually happens when a company goes public. Sooner or later, employees become secondary.
3. Stop working for evil companies.
numbnuts
Re: Is this a surprise? (Score:2, Insightful)
What is shocking is that the google employees dont know how it works outside of google. This happens everywhere, perks decrease as a company grows, plain and simple
Re: Is this a surprise? (Score:3, Interesting)
Really? I've only seen the opposite happen where I work: A very big hospital company that many cyberpunk fans might refer to as a megacorp.
And I gotta say, it's good to work for a megacorp like the one I work at, and nothing is more fun than making conspiracy theorists that think they live in a cyberpunk novel feel opressed.
And it's also nice that the megacorp I work for paid 100% of the cost of my lung transplant (caused by CF) in addition to paying 100% of the cost of the meds I need for it for as long as
Re: (Score:2)
They paid for your lung transplant and pay for the medication while you work there.
Hmm.
Don't get me wrong, but if this WAS a cyberpunk novel...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Is this a surprise? (Score:5, Interesting)
Really? I've worked at 3 places, a university, a mid-sized 850 person corporation (independent branch of a larger, 20k person multinational) and a small business (now about 50 people).
The small business has near zero perks. Pop in the warehouse fridge, sometimes and if you like diet cherry Coke or some Mt. Dew variant about half the time. Shitty TGIFridays level appetizer platters about 3 times a year during phony quarterly meetings held at 3 PM on Friday. Travel and other expenses can be parsimonious.
The university was about what you expected from a state institution, there was no free stuff but we seemed to have more food around the office than the small biz. The department was run by seasoned bureaucrats, I imagine they had weaseled in some staff welfare line item that let them buy grub.
The bigger business seemed way more generous. Food/pop was common in meetings, including lunches. Expense limits for travel were beyond generous, I actually asked the guy responsible for them if I could split the savings if I stayed in cheaper hotels and ate cheaper meals but he gave me some song and dance about how I should eat and sleep well to perform well away from home, the company had some concern about employee safety, etc.
My sense is there's just more slop in a large organization than a small one. I'm sure big companies are top notch at treating large groups of identical employees cheaply, but they aren't always very efficient and you can sometimes get in on the extras. Small business is the worst.
Re: (Score:3)
Slipper slope (Score:5, Insightful)
Google needs to be careful with this slippery slope. The reason they can attract so many great employees despite being a huge company is because of a culture of taking care of their employees better than most big companies. The moment they become just another HP, IBM, etc, they will start to degrade quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
Google's new owners, the shareholders, probably care less about that the original owners did.
The original owners still control most of the voting rights.
Re: (Score:1)
After the slipper slope comes the loafer slope
Slippery slope? They are deep in the mud pool (Score:4, Insightful)
The reason they can attract so many great employees
Like who now? Where is the evidence that in the past five years, they have attracted "so many great employees". I see a LOT of failed projects and an inability to stick to anything. Core search remains really good as always, but don't you get the impression of a group of ten people in a small room, who have barricaded all the doors and are trying to keep the howling mob at bay from the one area of Google that still functions perfectly?
because of a culture of taking care of their employees
Yes they certainly have a. culture of "taking care" of employees now. Just ask Damore...
The moment they become just another HP, IBM
Google has chosen a different path, far less boring and far more self-destructive.
Re: (Score:3)
I see a LOT of failed projects and an inability to stick to anything.
This is what happens when you try lots of new ideas, and explore all the options. Some will pan out, most will not.
Re:Slippery slope? They are deep in the mud pool (Score:5, Insightful)
Some will pan out, most will not.
The problem is that some panned out (a user base that liked what they were doing), and Google killed them anyway [lifehacker.com], in a lot of cases like taking a kitten that you loved and exposing it to powerful miutagens just to see what it would transform into. Or just plain shot the kitten, as per Google Reader.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that some panned out (a user base that liked what they were doing), and Google killed them anyway
Google has a different definition of "panned out", at least for free services. Unless a service has 100M+ users, or looks likely to get there, it's a flop and not worth the effort it takes to operate it.
Or just plain shot the kitten, as per Google Reader.
Google Reader is a good example. It had a few million devoted users, but wasn't growing and was clearly never going to build a large user base.
In cases like that, I do wish Google would experiment with charging for services and making them profitable that way. I think that might have worked with Reader.
Re: (Score:3)
What has panned out?
Google Maps.
Google Docs.
Gmail.
Android.
YouTube.
Waymo (still in progress).
Each of these is worth billions.
Re: (Score:2)
They wrote gmail, back when they still had the right stuff. They bought Google Docs. They bought Android. They bought YouTube. Dunno about maps, maybe they did something there.
Re: (Score:2)
Look how old ALL of those things are... you just proved my point sir by coming up with a slightly larger list than my own.
Re: Slippery slope? They are deep in the mud pool (Score:4, Informative)
Android is the one original thing theyâ(TM)ve done on that list.
Android was acquired.
Gmail and Waymo were built internally.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Slippery slope? They are deep in the mud pool (Score:1)
Mod parent up! I'm another AC who'd like to know what projects - other than ad words - have meaningfully added gross margin to Googles bottom line. You said "some do, some don't." List 5 or 10 that have moved the needle. Until you do, I'm going to get the popcorn and watch the snowflakes melt.
I see Google now like bell labs (you know, C, Unix, transistor, background radiation bell labs) then. Minus the over indulged, sjw culture that has produced buckets of cash, intolerance rivaling the Nazis, but little
Re: Slippery slope? They are deep in the mud pool (Score:1)
Driverless cars and AI.
LOL. How's that koolaid taste?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Slippery slope? They are deep in the mud pool (Score:1)
Ever quarter they have record profits, that's really strong evidence.
What's sad is how many people liked your post, which means people are more interested in fast talkers than facts. Sad.
Re: Slippery slope? They are deep in the mud pool (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: Slippery slope? They are deep in the mud pool (Score:2, Insightful)
You got modded down because you are siding with google even after they fired him. When they shouldn't have. You are ok with hurting people because of their beliefs and that is NOT OK. That's why you got modded down. Learn the difference idiot.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
You got modded down because you are siding with google even after they fired him.
Precisely: I think google did the right thing but there are a lot of exceptionally delicate snowflakes here who cannot abide by dissenting opions.
You are ok with hurting people because of their beliefs and that is NOT OK.
His actions got him fired, not his beliefs. Spelling out your beliefs in a manifesto and relentlessly plugging it until people take notice is an action not a belief.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And, if you point out how the culture of your giant company is repulsive to women, is a functioning patriarchy that uses systemic and intrinsic sexism to abuse both sexes solely for the benefit of the company, and that changing this corporate culture to something healthy and egalitarian would not only cost the company vast amounts of money, but would also result in the loss of untold amounts of free labor the company currently benefits from, you could bet that said company will do everything they can to und
Google = R+D arm of the NSA (Score:1)
After decades of failed IT projects, the Deep State entities in the USA were desperate for any new method that would allow their Orwellian concepts to be finally implemented. The rise of Google was a result of the new thinking, where traditional mega corrupt mega expensive projects that took the same form as major weapons contracts in the USA were replaced with Apple/Microsoft (early days) like start-ups that pretended to be entirely in the civilian sector.
Public PR (including 'leaks') is for be-ta public c
Re:Slipper slope (Score:5, Interesting)
The reason they can attract so many great employees despite being a huge company is because of a culture of taking care of their employees better than most big companies.
I realize this is just a very-small-size anecdote, but - back six or seven years ago, it seemed like we were losing one or two faculty members (or people we were trying to recruit as new faculty) to Google. It also seemed like our best and brightest grad students were largely going to Google after graduation. But nowadays, the faculty I know who went there have all left, save one... and it doesn’t seem like our students regard it nearly as highly as before.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That people are not at their first serious job after 6 or 7 years sound normal to me.
Matches my experience as well, especially in the Tech world. Personally been about every 5 years or so. Seems like that's the only way to get any sort of a decent pay bump in this line work.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
C'mon, give it up. Google got caught out celebrating their employees political voices, whilst going behind their employees back to lobby government to make those voices criminal, Google will not send their employees to prison for activism against Google, ohh no, the government will do that and Google will try to protect their employees and fail, boo hoo, cough, cough, tee hee.
Google played the game that would garner the best as bait, get them hooked and then down come the fucking screws. Bend the fuck over
I'd rather Google fixes their consumer products... (Score:3)
In addition to "cutting costs" why doesn't Google at least fix their deficient software?
One product I can think of is GBoard. Imagine, just adding a new word to its dictionary if so cumbersome. One may think the app is still a beta version. While using it, it underlines any word it doesn't know; long clicking this "unknown" word brings up a menu sans "Add to dictionary!"
Google; you surely can do better.
My, how quickly they grow up. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:My, how quickly they grow up. (Score:5, Insightful)
All companies do this. What Google failed to do though was keep the internal memos secret. There's a reason that companies don't like to share things like how much your coworkers make, who can get promoted, and so forth. Because someone will always be upset when they find out. No one really gets paid on merit. I know one group where the best worker is paid the least and the least effective worker is paid the most, and the reasons for this have to do with the initial starting salary and the inability to either rapidly promote or cut pay once granted.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No it isn't. It's called "employment at will" - don't want to work for the wages you've negotiated or keeping the company hostage for group wage increases without merit and you're fired.
Re: (Score:2)
That depends on where you are located. In California I don't think that "employment at will" applies and since the majority of Google's employees are in California they have the option. Though I can't see them ganging up to form a union.
Re: (Score:2)
Wages for salaried workers will never be uniform. They are not paid on a fixed and predictable scale. The pay tiers often have a huge range between top and bottom pay, so even with the same title and duties and tier there can be a $50K difference in pay or more.It is also up to the manager to decide how much of the pay increase granted to the group is to be spread around, who gets the bonuses, and so forth, and after that the directors and VPs will often go and revise the manager's decisions. And of cour
Re: (Score:2)
There's a reason IT workers never unionize. They're a pretty smart bunch you know and good IT workers never have to worry about getting the wages or wage increases they deserve.
more please (Score:3, Insightful)
.
Time to stop having an important company from being run by a college student-thinking mob.
Re: (Score:3)
As an employee and investor, I'm all for Google growing up a little bit and toning down some policies that aren't suitable for a large company
As an employee (which means investor) I think this shift may be necessary, but find it sad. Mostly, I regret the loss of Google's ability to practice radical transparency internally. When I joined the company eight years ago (from incredibly-siloed IBM), I was floored by the amount of information that was shared in the weekly TGIFs, and the fact that any employee could stand up and ask hard questions of the CEO, in front of all of the rest of the employees -- and almost always get real answers, not tapdanc
"Don't be evil" Right. (Score:2, Interesting)
I figured they'd start doing this sort of shit. I used to simply dislike Google, because Google. In the last few years, it's become a deep, profound loathing.
I avoid Google and the other Intertube predators any way I can, including removal, or if unremovable disabling, and avoiding the restart of any Google shit. I can't say I'm certain I've ended Google's collection of my data from my Android phone, but I've certainly done my best to minimize it. Fortunately it's easy to find alternatives
Re: (Score:2)
I've worked for many large companies, there are always people that live out in the parking lot and not necessarily because of low wages. I've known doctors that sleep in their offices or cars and bathe in the gym. I've done it myself at times even though I could technically afford housing somewhere.
So if they prepared a cost cutting memo... (Score:2)
Post this up. (Score:1)
It's strange how the administrative employee's, who know absolutely nothing about how the business was built or what it takes to keep highly intelligent people motivated, or even the kinds of problems highly intelligent people face, are discussing "Subtle" "Painless" blood-sucking pricks to the body of their host through budget cuts on systems they quite literally know nothing about and have not taken the time to learn about. Of course, Mosquito's don't think about their hosts catching malaria; like a moth
Nothing special, just Capitalism (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
According to Marx under normal circumstances capitalists will...
According to Marx, knowledge is irrelevant to production, only labor and raw materials matter. IOW, Marx's ideas are inapplicable in any economy or market where new ideas are created, which is pretty much the opposite of what the tech industry is/does. Under Marx's assumptions all workers are identical and replaceable and there are always enough workers available so that any worker that demands more than is necessary for bare survival can be replaced with one who does not.
None of Marx's assumptions are
Less Experienced Developers Do Better Work (Score:2, Interesting)
From all my experience as a software developer since 1984 to the present day at many different companies, I will argue strongly that the combination of less experienced developers and healthy team dynamics make for the highest quality and more successful software with users. They design software that is easier to read and more intuitive for users, even if not super fancy and stylish. This is important because the real key to commercial success in software is:
** it must be very
This is the HR dept coming up with this. (Score:2)
When the role of HR becomes cost cutting, instead managing and promoting an effective team environment, then your outfit is just another asshole corporation. And i think days of " Do no Evil " died about the same time.
protest from within (Score:2)
there has been some vocal user protest against google the last few years, but now more and more protest is comming from within the company, from its employers. this is bad (for google), things like this could point to the start of the downfall of google as a dominant company.
Pretty evil... (Score:2)
"The document said this could be rolled out without upsetting staff because workers didn't know what the existing rate was"
- Many of Google's employees are relatively competent in mathematics. They can be expected to determine the previous rates with little difficulty.
"...also proposed reducing wage bumps when workers get promoted."
- Corporate policy. Perhaps well described as a calculated risk. Win or lose, this is just management.
"also suggested changing Google's approach to "spot bonuses,""
- More corpora