In an email obtained by Motherboard, Google tells YouTube Music workers it will "not be participating in collective bargaining."

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
link
fedilink
English
181Y

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

The Doctor
link
fedilink
English
161Y

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?”

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.

gregorum
link
fedilink
English
51Y

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

Hot Saucerman
link
fedilink
English
77
edit-2
1Y

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
link
fedilink
English
18
edit-2
1Y

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

That sounds like their jobs require no talent and are easily replaced. Is it so?

Hot Saucerman
link
fedilink
English
111Y

removed by mod

Bipta
link
fedilink
-6
edit-2
1Y

They’re literally replying to a comment which made that case. It wasn’t even their original idea and you’re shitting on them for it. Learn to fucking read.

Edit: wow and it’s your own comment that you apparently don’t know how to read.

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.

Hot Saucerman
link
fedilink
English
10
edit-2
1Y

removed by mod

I was basing my question on the plan how Google uses contract work. Well it’s fucking hard to just throw that staff away if it’s not easy or what? Try to fucking give two seconds of thought before being an asshole fucking shit head.

My question was about them not being easily replaceable, like that other comment seemed to describe.

Have a shit fucking life.

Hot Saucerman
link
fedilink
English
11Y

removed by mod

Sorry about coming off as rude but all I wanted was an answer why they’d be easily replaceable because that’s the only way Google can willynilly just fire the entire staff. Otherwise the premise doesn’t make sense.

But you’re probably six feet deep on a five foot pole so apologies probably won’t do too much for your.

ram
link
fedilink
English
21Y

You really need a ukelele for your apologies.

GunnarRunnar
link
fedilink
01Y

What can I say, it kinda pisses me off that they set me up and can’t even answer the question.

Good news is that since I’m easily replaceable the next guy can worry about the perfect apology.

Bipta
link
fedilink
14
edit-2
1Y

As a user of YouTube Music, quite possibly.

They probably still deserve raises.

@[email protected]
link
fedilink
English
13
edit-2
1Y

It sounds like your job requires no talent and you could be easily replaced. Is it so?

Just because there are other people out there who can do the same job as you (or them) doesn’t mean that it takes no skill, nor that replacing them can be done at a snap of the fingers. But nobody is irreplaceable. That’s how companies see their employees. Even you.

@[email protected]
link
fedilink
English
-11Y

Of course everyone deserves a raise and I do hope they get everything they’re asking for, but some people are more easily replaceable than others and in this case there might just be nothing stopping them from being replaced. It sucks, but Google isn’t technically required to negotiate.

thejevans
link
fedilink
41Y

So? The whole point of organizing is that under capitalism, corporations hold way more bargaining power than individuals. Pointing out that a corporation isn’t “required” to cooperate is basically a non-statement.

@[email protected]
link
fedilink
English
-11Y

That’s a very defeatist attitude. In this case Google can just sign the contract to another company, but unions do work historically.

thejevans
link
fedilink
4
edit-2
1Y

They “work historically” because workers fought “illegally” for years for the rights and protections that exist today. I don’t understand how this is defeatist. I’m all for worker power, and I’m glad these people are trying to push the needle further.

Pointing out that the current state of the law isn’t on their side is either “defeatist” because it has some implicit is/ought bias or implies that they won’t change anything, or it’s meaningless because they already know what they’re fighting against.

skellener
link
fedilink
81Y

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

@[email protected]
creator
link
fedilink
111Y

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.

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 …

donuts
link
fedilink
61Y

What they should really do is pay musicians more.

interolivary
link
fedilink
31Y

Pay the execs more, you say? Sure thing!

@[email protected]
creator
link
fedilink
English
11Y

deleted by creator

Haus
link
fedilink
191Y

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

Metal Zealot
link
fedilink
11Y

deleted by creator

Create a post

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

  • 1 user online
  • 38 users / day
  • 149 users / week
  • 307 users / month
  • 2.32K users / 6 months
  • 1 subscriber
  • 3.01K Posts
  • 43.4K Comments
  • Modlog