YouTube Music team laid off by Google while workers testified to Austin City Council about working conditions::Some workers learned of the YouTube Music layoffs while testifying to the Austin city council about Google’s refusal to negotiate with the union.

123 points

YouTube music being built by Cognizant makes sense tbh.

permalink
report
reply
28 points

… Realest comment so far

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Hmm I wonder if they’re responsible for the Audible app, too?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

It all makes sense now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
82 points
*

Cognizant, a professional services company that Alphabet contracted the YouTube Music team through, said in a statement that the workers were let go after their contract ended at its intended date, according to KXAN in Austin.

A spokesperson for Google told Business Insider that Cognizant is responsible for ending the workers’ employment, not Google.

“Contracts with our suppliers across the company routinely end on their natural expiry date, which was agreed to with Cognizant,” the company said in a statement.

Not sure how much of the fault is from Google’s side here since the employees contracted from another company.

permalink
report
reply
109 points

I am not defending Google here, but Cognizant is trash. I run a firm of specialist and a bulk of our work is cleaning up after outfits like Cognizant , Infosys, etc.

All that said, firing a group of 43 workers that chose to unionize during an Austin City Council meeting as it was being live streamed is all sorts of spicy. Google and Cognizant fucked up.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

How’s that work, is there lots of hair pulling? Or are you able to charge an arm and a leg and set your timelines because the clients don’t have much of a choice?

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s no surprise, after all Cognizant is the first letter in CHWTIA. 🤭

permalink
report
parent
reply
50 points
*

Contractors at Google and other tech companies are typically treated and managed as real employees except for minor legal-motivated things like travel which is treated differently.

Further, contracts are typically for a fixed period of time.

That these employees/contractors seemed genuinely surprised by the abrupt termination suggests this was not the natural end of their contract. Google, not Cognizant, decides when their contracts end. If their contracts were terminated with no warning or reason given, it was initiated by Google. And with that background it seems pretty likely it was in retaliation to the union activity.

“But they’re not Google employees”, right? But then, that’s why Google and other tech companies use contractors - to avoid giving those employees actual employee protections.

permalink
report
parent
reply
35 points

If the team is finding out that their job ends on the same day, it’s totally Google’s doing, and not the vendor company.

Google loves cheap, disposable workers, that why half of their workers are contractors.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

I mean, if you’re a contractor and they haven’t discussed extending more than a month ahead of time, expect your contract to end on its end date. That’s just common sense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

You assume the cognizant employees are privy to the contract terms.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I’ve worked at two employers who used the contractor loophole. At the first one, the length of the contract and extensions were never mentioned to me ever. The second one constantly played games with extension. At one point I was set to have my final week of employment, only for them to extend it over the weekend.

I’ve been in the contractor shoes for way longer than I should have (which is zero), So as a hardfast rule, “expect your contract to end on its end date” simply doesn’t hold up. Corps like to play games with it, and leave employees out of the loop.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

They did tell these employees to not worry about their contract ending, that it would be extended.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

The National Labor Review Board ruled that Google was a co-employer of these union members and, thus, ruled that both Google and Cognizant had to come to the table to hammer out a bargaining agreement with them. Google refused. When this council resolution was put forth, Katherine McAden of Google Austin emailed the Austin City Council members on 02/28/24 to ask them to postpone the vote to “give Google, and the City Council, time to fully understand the direction of this item and potential local outcomes.” The very next day (02/29/24), while two members were in the middle of testifying to the council, that was the exact moment Google fired the lot of them.

I don’t see how much more open and shut you can get here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Thank you for this. This should be the top comment.

I wonder how the new Cemex framework affects this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Lol corporate world is not for you my guy. They contract other companies specifically for this reason. Order cognizant to fire workers and when questioned , oooohh they were contractors. 🤷‍♀️

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

At least in the UK, if you work like an employee enough, the court can overrule the technicality of your employment status as a contractor and apply labor law protections.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

This is exactly what happened with these union members. The National Labor Review Board ruled that Google was a co-employer along with Cognizant, and they ruled that Google just come to the bargaining table with these union members. They refused. They emailed city council members asking for a postponement of their vote to give them time to sort stuff out, and it was granted. The very next day, the fired the entire union out of retaliation for speaking to the city council voicing their concerns.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

You have any idea the wide spread feelings on this?

It sounds like that’s what we should be doing in more countries,.US.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Oh the US has tried to fix this issue multiple times. The end result was many of us getting laid off after 18 months every time because they couldn’t extend our contacts any further by law. There’s no reason for a company to convert a contractor if they’re not required to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

On the books, that is the case in the US too but it is almost never enforced

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Contactor staffing companies exist solely to get around employment regulations. Demonic industry

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Blaming another business? Hmmm. Sounds like Boeing’s attempted solution.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Yeah I don’t understand why Google is being blamed here. If the contact ended with Cognizant then it is upto Cognizant to find other projects for the people who were part of the contract. That’s how it works with these companies. If CTS couldn’t find work in other projects then it’s on CTS and not on Google

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The National Labor Review Board ruled that Google was a co-employer of these union members and, thus, ruled that both Google and Cognizant had to come to the table to hammer out a bargaining agreement with them. Google refused that order. When this council resolution was put forth, Katherine McAden of Google Austin emailed the Austin City Council members on 02/28/24 to ask them to postpone the vote to “give Google, and the City Council, time to fully understand the direction of this item and potential local outcomes.” The very next day (02/29/24), while two members were in the middle of testifying to the council, that was the exact moment Google fired the lot of them.

I don’t see how much more open and shut you can get here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I see. Thanks for this. Explains it more clearly. I thought the situation was more amicable than this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points

Damn it, what am I supposed to do with this pitchfork now?

But seriously, shitty misleading headline.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

If you watch the video, one of the union members is at the Council meeting speaking to the City Council and another union member walks up to him to inform him that they were laid off with immediate effect. The workers both seemed genuinely surprised that they were laid off.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Use it.

Don’t be fooled by layers of bureaucracy.

As along as it lands in the soft belly of those in the owner class or their supporters, it has served it purpose.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-17 points

Take your dumb reddit shit back to reddit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The “pitchfork” joke dates back to Fark, my friend.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Welcome to the internet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

Having moved onto a team in my company with Cognizant contractors, I can kinda understand Google not renewing the contract. In my experience, half of the PRs needed to be redone because of poor quality.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Yep. Worked with them before. They coached their consultants to pass our tech interviews but had zero actual experience. One guy didn’t know how to open a rails console… On a rails app job. Accenture is just as bad.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

They’d been working on this contract for five years. And the NLRB ruled that Google was a co-employer and must sit down with the union to work out a bargaining agreement. This firing was not to do with their job skills. It was entirely retaliatory.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

That sounds all kinds of highly illegal and I cannot wait for the delicious lawsuit

permalink
report
reply
18 points

It’s Texas, don’t hold your breath.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I never see repurcussions for this in the US but maybe it’s just not reported as much

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Well, well, well… who would have thought that the company who said don’t do evil did evil anyway. This is why I don’t trust corporations because their only loyalty is to investors who just wants more money.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

Genuinely, why is it so difficult to be a good company? There’s that one company that paid all their workers like 70k and the employees would die for the company. Loyalty means something and reinvesting in your workers builds a stronger company, no? What’s the deal? Everyone fights for pennies vs building a strong foundation in a company culture and living it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

The people making the big decisions aren’t the ones working. They’re the ones put in charge to make money for investors, who want monthly returns. Not “here’s what will get us 1XX% growth in 6-8 years,” but now.

And you’d think this would only be the case with public companies, but private equity is gobbling up quality companies and milking them dry by cutting costs and abusing their brand’s good name. People want returns on their investments QUICK these days.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Are you talking about Gravity Payments and its CEO, Dan Price? Sorry to break the fairy tale but it has been shown that he is some weird, creepy guy who ran his team like a cult and accused of sexual allegations. He resigned over a year ago. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/aug/18/dan-price-resigns-ceo-gravity-payments

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Interesting. Thanks for sharing, I had no idea. I only checked wiki, but I see that the company is still doing well and has continued to pay it’s staff well through 2023 (wiki link).

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

In most cases the shareholders that own the company don’t care about the company’s purpose, just their ROI in a certain time frame. And then the executives incentives are structured to reward quick financial results.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Honest answer. Infinite growth is the only business model we universally accept. This puts unrealistic expectations on how we define success.

It’s not enough to own a successful diner making good cheap food for 500 people a day. Why can’t you do that for 5000 people? 50,000 people? Then in comes efficiency and questions about profit. Meanwhile your Zadie who started the restaurant 60 years ago is long dead and so is the simple life he envisioned for his kids.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 10K

    Posts

  • 466K

    Comments