• @fubo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1672 years ago

    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 …

    • nudny ekscentryk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      222 years ago

      I want to, but I can’t shake off the feeling that Google does have a point here: it’s like requiring Amazon to bargain with DHL’s drivers. It’s kind of not their issue: they pay DHL for their services and DHL commissions their employees to do particular tasks.

      • Blooper
        link
        fedilink
        English
        112 years ago

        Yes, I think that’s the reasonable argument Google’s lawyers and PR will use - but your example kind of demonstrates why that argument falls flat. The service DHL is providing to Amazon is logistics and shipping. This is an established, well-regulated industry all its own.

        Meanwhile, at Google, this contractor’s services are listed in the article:

        ensuring music content is available and approved for YouTube Music’s 80 million subscribers worldwide

        That sounds an awful lot like running the service to me. These employees perform key YouTube-specific work on an ongoing basis. For all intents and purposes, they work for Google, in Google’s offices, on Google’s systems, but their paycheck comes from Cognizant. The services being rendered aren’t on the level of “you make the widget and we’ll transport it to stores around the country because we’re a shipping company”. This is more like “we employ people for you, but provide a flimsy air gap so you don’t have to treat them like actual employees. We sell legally plausible deniability as a service.”

        • nudny ekscentryk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          4
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          ensuring music content is available and approved for YouTube Music’s 80 million subscribers worldwide

          this could really mean anything from running the entire service to merely scraping lyrics. and since it’s a group of 49 people, I wanna say it’s probably something along the lines of the latter. but yeah, your point in general stands.

          • Blooper
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32 years ago

            Absolutely fair. But as one of those IT dudes who used to be a contractor but now work for the same megacorp I was contracting for - I wouldn’t bet on it being super menial stuff. I love my job and my employer, but it’s very well understood that the agencies are essentially a cover for some fairly serious labor law violations.

            • nudny ekscentryk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 years ago

              according to Times, Cognizant workers in Dublin were previously contracted for verifying business listings in Google Maps. this is far from “running the service” I’m afraid

      • @kool_newt@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 years ago

        True, but is this maybe WHY Google uses subcontractors – to avoid direct responsibility and need to negotiate?

        • @SpiderShoeCult@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 years ago

          Yeah, apparently working as a contractor apparently involves a middleman, a ‘pimp’, if you will, that brings nothing to the contractor, the person doing the labour, but instead just serves to make it easy for the company in need of services to skirt labor laws. Even unionized, what are you going to do, strike against the one with which you do the actual contracting by not attending the monthly check-ins with PimpCo and refusing to submit your timesheets?

          I wonder, however, shouldn’t not doing the work cause a breach of contract between the company requesting the service and the middleman and thus cost the middleman some valuable business?

          • @ricecake@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            Your last paragraph is the actual value of a unionized strike as a subcontractor.
            If your employees strike, you can’t fulfill your business obligations, and so you get pressured by the people you have a contract with.

            The activity that skirts labor law is individual contractors, who are often indistinguishable from employees except for tax status and are much more often taken advantage of.

            A contracting company is just a company agreeing to do business with another, and doing so via it’s employees. It’s basically identical to a auto parts manufacturer selling parts to a car company. A Ford parts supplier is largely just a middleman for managing the production of parts to keep Ford from having to manage that process itself. Ford can’t renegotiate those employees contracts, even though their work is directly to a spec dictated by Ford.

    • plz1
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      So Google, like Amazon, is trying to play the “they work for a subcontractor that only supports us, so it’s their fault, not ours” card. I really want to see the NLRB smack this pattern down hard and set an example for all the other companies to try to avoid unionization by way of not directly hiring people.