• Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    10 months ago

    I think the comments are cutting Alphabet too much slack. Yes the billionaire is heartless, but he isn’t wrong. Alphabet was careless. They binged on talent because they did not, and do not, place significant weight on the consequences of their hubris. Why? Because ultimately it is the workers that have to pay the price, not the executives that hired carelessly. If you do not force management to care, they won’t.

    I always think of Indeed and their CEO. They too hired too many too quickly and were forced to fire. What did the CEO do? Not only did the company make sure the severance package was generous, the CEO took a pay cut too.

      • steventrouble@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Yup, I heard this rumor at Google when I worked there, and it does make some amount of sense. If the best engineers aren’t working for the competition, then nobody else can compete. I doubt it’s true, but it did often felt like we were paid to work on trivial tasks.

        It’s a shame because there was work that could have been done to improve Google’s business, but execs took engineers off of them to move to Google Cloud (AKA, “sit on your hands and wait 2 years for your doc to be approved”). Google had so many good products that engineers truly wanted to work on like Stadia, Domains, and Area 120, and they cancelled them all. It happened so often that a couple of my coworkers pretended to hate working on their team “so it wouldn’t get cancelled”.

    • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      The thing about Google is that they have one of the highest profit-per-employee metrics in the whole industry.