←back to thread

Google offers 'voluntary exit' to all US platforms and devices employees

(www.theverge.com)
161 points unsnap_biceps | 6 comments | 31 Jan 25 23:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.603s | source | bottom
Show context
jonas21 ◴[01 Feb 25 01:40 UTC] No.42894769[source]▶
This seems like a pretty bold and employee-friendly move. Google recently merged two large divisions, so there's going to be some redundancy. Most companies would resolve this with a layoff, but it sounds like they're trying a buyout at the request of their employees. From the article:

> Some employees at Google have recently been circulating a petition that calls for CEO Sundar Pichai to offer exactly this type of optional buyout before resorting to involuntary layoffs. “Ongoing rounds of layoffs make us feel insecure about our jobs,” the petition said, according to CNBC.

Conventional wisdom is that with voluntary buyouts, high-performing employees who have the most options will leave and lower-performing employees will stay.

We'll see how it turns out.

replies(6): >>42894834 #>>42894883 #>>42895044 #>>42895095 #>>42895826 #>>42896579 #
refulgentis ◴[01 Feb 25 01:56 UTC] No.42894883[source]▶
> Google recently merged two large divisions, so there's going to be some redundancy

I don't see why - it was corporate games of thrones stuff, the hardware VP got the software VP's toys. (disclaimer: worked 7 years in P&E until I left in 2023)

replies(1): >>42894956 #
1. thevillagechief ◴[01 Feb 25 02:09 UTC] No.42894956[source]▶
Perhaps you can help me answer a question I've had for a long time. How is that hardware VP still there? It seems to me from the outside much better fits have been pushed out, but he's still hanging on. Is he really that good that these games?
replies(3): >>42895613 #>>42897341 #>>42908405 #
2. refulgentis ◴[01 Feb 25 04:22 UTC] No.42895613[source]▶
My thinkings basically the same as yours. I probably also have about as much info as you on the matter, but then again, even knowing the "facts on the ground" aren't misaligned with that conclusion says something.

I honestly don't really know if there were better alternatives. But I definitely lost a lot of faith somewhere between the Google IO where they packed every announcement for the next two years they could think of, managing to announce AR glasses again, only to have to cancel them a year later.

If the sell was professionalism via Motorola experience, that's not what happened.

But quite the loyal soldier, I think the public record has a very clear accounting of how many boneheaded decisions were made at the altar of Good Budgeting*, and the MBAs have thoroughly ate the company in general. They must enjoy his work.

* bungling maintaining the tablet; marching onto a nonsensical goal to have Android eat ChromeOS while embarrassing themselves publicly mumbling about how its because AI, when really, its because politics. Meanwhile fantastic software work that would have fit right into a world with LLMs was shitcanned at the altar of Efficiency™ and focusing on getting products out.

replies(1): >>42895866 #
3. aoeusnth1 ◴[01 Feb 25 05:16 UTC] No.42895866[source]▶
I believe the ChromeOS -> Android move was because the CrOS model of having Google pay for the testing support of partner devices was not working out, and moving towards Android's model would cut costs while also cutting duplicate development costs.
replies(1): >>42902366 #
4. kevingadd ◴[01 Feb 25 10:17 UTC] No.42897341[source]▶
Incompetent VPs have a way of sticking around at Google and rising up into higher positions of power even if employee surveys show managers and ICs underneath have no confidence in them, at least based on the bad VPs I had to deal with while I was there (in a different org).
5. refulgentis ◴[01 Feb 25 21:10 UTC] No.42902366{3}[source]▶
Fascinating...I did well-known work at G, but at the end of the day just a line-level report on Android. I'm a little bit surprised, but, in ways a line-level report would be. Naive ways. (who cares!? You gotta test on partner devices anyway!! and who cares?! Google can afford it!)

Thinking on it, it's rational if that was the impetus. Why lose money? I guess I'm more sore over BSing ('because AI'), that TQ was shitcanned in the name of "let's ship devices", just to turn around and do N years of getting ChromeOS onto Android. Finally, I always saw ChromeOS as *awesome*, much better than Win/macOS...modulo the hardware...and the Linux VM perf penalty...but man its complex. To start unwinding the Android VM perf penalty, you'd have to shift off an Android VM onto Android anyway...

gah I should stop writing. Tough problems, no easy answers.

Just really disappointed it went this route. I joined G in 2016 as an Apple fanboy and was really chuffed by this new hardware division that'd induce discipline and steadily build out a real ecosystem. It's 9 years later, there's no real commitment beyond the phone and watch, which were both ~ready in 2016, and multiple half-assed commitments that were rolled back.

6. UncleMeat ◴[02 Feb 25 13:11 UTC] No.42908405[source]▶
Rick must be good at executive politics.

Mergers of orgs this big are rarely about organization efficiency and are instead about scope and retention for SVPs. Rick wanted more power. Sundar must like Rick. So Rick got more power.

Using this as an excuse for layoffs (we all know that after the voluntary ones will come the non-voluntary ones) is garbage. The people making the decision to merge these orgs knew how big they were. It isn't like this is a surprise to anybody.