• @penguin@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        1911 months ago

        It has nothing to do with profits. It’s more profitable to have everyone work from home. Upper managers and executives simply prefer having everyone in the office because they like it. It’s their preference.

          • @Devdogg@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            711 months ago

            Uhh, yes it is? I mean, if you take a look at how much real estate San Francisco has just in its downtown area that should tell you something.

    • Cosmonaut_Collin
      link
      fedilink
      1011 months ago

      Can we please think of the billionaires? What are they gonna do when their office buildings are empty? They need their property value! /s

  • Not A Bird
    link
    fedilink
    193
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Isn’t that the dream for a capitalist! Labor that sleeps at work. Google takes it a step further and asks employees to pay for being able to sleep at work.

      • @happy_camper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        711 months ago

        The score is just soulless “lo-fi beats” type of music played all over the grounds to avoid any one person ever having to sit alone with just their thoughts as background noise.

      • @Shard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        411 months ago

        Holy hell boss.

        I thought you meant something like china’s social credit score.

        Get more points, you get a better chair and OLED screen or even a chance at a promotion.

        Points go down, you get sent to a shitty cubicle at the far corner of the office. Then a verbal warning, followed by a written warning…

      • @Shard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        311 months ago

        Holy hell boss.

        I thought you meant something like china’s social credit score.

        Get more points, you get a better chair and OLED screen or even a chance at a promotion.

        Points go down, you get sent to a shitty cubicle at the far corner of the office. Then a verbal warning, followed by a written warning…

    • @jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      4711 months ago

      Companies will start using crypto as a way to recreate what scrip was back before it was banned. Meta made a play for that a few years back but luckily they failed.

      • @cadekat@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        211 months ago

        Say what you want about crypto in general, but it’d be an extremely bad choice for company scrip…

        • @jonne@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          1011 months ago

          Depends on the implementation, you can make contracts do anything, and if the bulk of the currency is premined and in the hands of the corporation, they can manipulate its value freely. Not every cryptocurrency works the way Bitcoin or Etherium work, some are quite centralised (see XRP for example).

          Meta could demand that ads on its platform are paid in metabucks, pay employees (partly) in metabucks and manipulate the market by controlling liquidity. Essentially they’d be their own sovereign corporation issuing its own currency.

          • @cadekat@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            111 months ago

            All true!

            You should consider transaction fees though: someone’s gotta pay 'em. “Run their own chain” you might say, but then just use a database. Don’t need crypto-economic security when you’re the issuer and primary retailer.

            That leads into having a public ledger. Great for public blockchains, but if you’re issuing company scrip, you probably don’t want outsiders auditing transactions.

            • @jonne@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              111 months ago

              Yeah, transaction fees can go to the issuer, so the corporation could double dip.

              And as for transactions being publicly available on the ledger, SEC filings are public too, corporations openly bragged about raising prices beyond inflation and making record profits and they still had most of the populace convinced that the cause of inflation was just those darn lazy Millennials that didn’t want to work any more.

              In the modern manufacturing consent era, it doesn’t matter that the truth is publicly available as long as you control mainstream media (which a corporation like Meta can easily do, first on their own platform and secondly by buying ads in the right newspapers).

  • @Lord_McAlister@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    13211 months ago

    Sooooooooooome people say man is made out of mud, the poor man’s made out of muscle and blood. Muscle and blood, skin and bone, a mind that’s weak and a back thats strong… You move 16 tons… whadaya get? Another day older and deeper in debt… St. Peter don’tcha call me because I can’t go…

    I owe my soul… to the company store…

  • @carl_dungeon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    12211 months ago

    Fucking company town. Google has become a real shit company. Switch your default search to duck duck go or anything else people!

      • Stefen Auris
        link
        fedilink
        811 months ago

        As awesome as it is, it’s still a meta search engine so you’d have to remember to exclude Google. Otherwise hosting your own search engine is mega cool!

        • oo1
          link
          fedilink
          611 months ago

          yeah, using a someone elses public searx (like i do ) just seems unhygienic.

    • @Steeve@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      9
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      So this is absolutely a scummy move by google, no doubt, but google employees are some of the highest paid people in the world at this point. Boycott them if you want, but don’t feel like you have to right this injustice done to their employees, because they’ve still got it really good.

      Edit: Just so this doesn’t come across as a crabs in a bucket type scenario, I am in this field and I am fortunate enough to make similar money, not as much, but equivalent in my country’s market. We are not the people that need fighting for, we’re the ones that should be fighting for others to have similar opportunities.

      • @carl_dungeon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        1911 months ago

        No I just mean the this is yet another item in a LOOOOOOOONG line of things where Google has gone the pure shit route.

        In the last couple years, Google serves me more ads as search results than actual relevant results. The enshitification of the internet is real and I finally see it. I’ve have enough. Between Reddit, twitter, Google, SEO, Facebook and friends, Amazon becoming wish.con, etc everything is just going to shit. Maybe it makes me some old boomer dreaming of the glory days, but I’ve had enough. I refuse to be a product and I refuse to put any money towards these shitmaster overlords if there’s any way I can help it.

          • @kamenoko@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            611 months ago

            Your edit doesn’t do it for me. You guys managed to get remote work, and now it’s being taken away. Do you think the pay scale has anything to do with what’s going on here?

            • @Steeve@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Google still has fully remote employees, they’re asking non remote employees back into the office a few days a week. Last I heard you can still apply to transfer to fully remote.

  • Thales
    link
    fedilink
    10511 months ago

    The advertisement entices workers to make the jump, even for a short while, to its on-campus hotel, saying: “Just imagine no commute to the office in the morning and instead, you could have an extra hour of sleep and less friction,” CNBC reported.

    Did these stupid motherfuckers read their own ad??

    No commute and extra sleep? That sounds great!

    No wonder everyone is trying to WFH - the very same reasons you just listed.

  • @o_o@lemmy.fmhy.net
    link
    fedilink
    8611 months ago

    It may be cheaper than a hotel or apartment, but why should an employee have to pay to go to work when they could be working remotely?

    • @MrSqueezles@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      2511 months ago

      This hotel has been there for a while for visiting employees, paid for by the company. People wanted this option if, for example, you lived in Brazil, wanted to visit the US, but didn’t have any reason to book a business trip because you don’t work with anyone at headquarters. I’m going to guess that most paying guests won’t be reporting for work during their stays, but will be grabbing a solid 3 meals a day, plus snacks.

  • @tryharder@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    7611 months ago

    All these comments comparing this to company scrip are profoundly ignorant, and are downright insulting to the victims of robber barons and capitalism in Appalachia. Google pays salaries in USD. They don’t pay a worker 10 GoogleBucks per ton. Google doesn’t force their workers to live at Google tenements or stay at Google hotels. Hell, they don’t even force you to go into a Google office. All they’ll do is make a note on your “permanent record” at performance review time if you were in the office less than 60% of the time. In coal country, if you showed up at a picket line instead of the mine, they’d send in Pinkerton goons to murder you, and the mayor too.

    Call me a bootlicker, I don’t care, but I actually think this is brilliant on Google’s part. Median rent in Mountain View for a 1br is $3600/mo. They’re renting rooms to their high-paid employees for ~15% less than market rent, right on campus, avoiding them from pricing out another local family if all they need is a place to sleep. Sillycon Valley is a terrible place to live. It’s a place to go for a couple years, make a bunch of money, live worse than a broke student, and GTFO as soon as possible. It’s like working on an offshore oil rig, with the gender ratio to match…

    Unlike the coal towns’ usurious pricing to a captive market (another day older and deeper in debt), Google is almost certainly losing money on this hotel. They don’t care. They shell out twice as much for a temporary apartment with every corporate relocation package they give to new hires.

    Google would like to build more market rate housing to meet demand. Unfortunately, building any new housing is illegal because the real estate cartel runs City Council, so Google takes over an existing hotel and prices it like an apartment. It’s the reverse Airbnb. You love to see it. It’s not a silver bullet. There are no silver bullets when the cartel cornered the local housing market 15 years ago, but every little bit to undermine their stranglehold on power helps. FDR and Stalin were natural enemies, and yet they both recognized in that moment, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Same goes here. Critical support for Google.

    • const void*
      link
      fedilink
      22
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I agree. These are all great reasons to not work there anymore. There are other workplaces that don’t operate like a plantation, and are happy to pluck googles best and brightest from the clutches of an unappreciative plantation owner. This biggest difference is Google employees are not enslaved, and can leave at will.

      It’s clear google doesn’t want their working class to work there. Fantastic idea!

      Charging employees $99/night for the pleasure of staying on the masters plantation is a stupid test, and the best way to pass is not to play.

    • Roboticide
      link
      fedilink
      1911 months ago

      While I get your point, here’s the other issue with how this is framed.

      The advertisement entices workers to make the jump, even for a short while, to its on-campus hotel, saying: “Just imagine no commute to the office in the morning and instead, you could have an extra hour of sleep and less friction,” CNBC reported. “Next, you could walk out of your room and quickly grab a delicious breakfast or get a workout in before work starts.” It adds that after the end of the work day, “you could enjoy a quiet evening on top of the rooftop deck or take in one of the fun local activities.”

      I can imagine that, at least except for the rooftop deck. Working from home. Without having to pay $99/night.

      They could avoid this whole thing by simply just not forcing people to go back to the office.

    • @STUPIDVIPGUY@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      18
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      how is this shit upvoted? cool they’re not as bad as they could be. doesn’t make it a good idea.

      they’re gonna go the classic corporate route of attracting people to a new system with nice benefits and relatively reasonable prices, only to enshittify it once people are attached to it

    • @Shatur@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      1311 months ago

      So If you need to work overtime, now you also need to pay 99$ if you want to sleep a few hours before the next day?

      • @kklusz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        8
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        The whole comment literally just explained how this benefits employees too, but you chose to ignore all that and say something completely irrelevant.

        • @Shatur@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          311 months ago

          I mentioned valid concern. Overtime is bad, but in reality it happens. And it looks like workers will have to pay rent if they stay and want to sleep a few hours in bed.

    • @clbustos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      711 months ago

      Unlike the coal towns’ usurious pricing to a captive market (another day older and deeper in debt), Google is almost certainly losing money on this hotel. They don’t care. They shell out twice as much for a temporary apartment with every corporate relocation package they give to new hires.

      Oh, my little boy/girl, if they do it, they’re never going to lose money in the end. Their business is not hotelling; it’s ads powered by software. If maintaining the workers in a semi-slave state works for them, this is a minor cost for them

      • @mriormro@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        1011 months ago

        Ironically, you sound incredibly petulant whenever you refer to someone else you’re trying to argue with as ‘boy/girl’. It also doesn’t lend the air of maturity that you may think it does.

    • @urist
      link
      3
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I completely agree with this take. These developers, if they don’t like Google’s hybrid work policies can just change jobs?

      Like, I’m happy for developers who can figure out how to work from home, and it sucks when their job changes so they can no longer do that. I hope they can fight for their rights so they can continue to work from home.

      But let’s be realistic: It’s a hotel that is optional to stay at for $99 a night. This isn’t at all like company script, and I’d much rather be the developer being asked to return to their office job than the housekeeper employed at Hotel Google figuring out how to pay rent in California. I’m not sure that people realize this but hotels take a lot of staff (housekeepers, front desk, laundry workers for sheets/towels). II’d hope that Google is paying them fair wages, but if I had a bet, they’ve contracted a hospitality company for this. Those workers are probably underpaid.

      This kind of feels like what-a-bout-ism, but techy spaces like this seem laser-focused on what are basically white-collar worker problems. Comparing charging for a hotel to working in a coal mine for script is deeply out of touch.

  • originalucifer
    link
    fedilink
    5811 months ago

    isnt this the opposite direction prospective employees would be going? who the hell is looking to live at their job?

    • IWantToFuckSpez
      link
      fedilink
      1811 months ago

      This is unfortunately really common in East-Asia. Samsung employees live in Samsung apartments, ride the Samsung metro to work, pay for things with their Samsung wallet, while they listen to Samsung controlled news. Google would love to become the Samsung of the West.

    • @Noughmad@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      33
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      You commit 16 lines, what do you get?

      Another day older and deeper in debt

      St. Peter, don’t you call me 'cause I can’t go

      I owe my soul to the company store

      • AbsentBird
        link
        fedilink
        1711 months ago

        Some people say a man is made outta blood. A code monkey’s made out of Fritos and crud. Fritos and crud and skin and bone. A back that’s weak and a mind that’s strong…

    • @atticus88th@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      2511 months ago

      Sounds illegal until I realized its tech workers who refuse to unionize and think they are getting paid bank but to live like a virtual slave.

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)
        link
        fedilink
        2411 months ago

        As one in the industry, it’s incredibly frustrating. Colleagues have been saying “oh, we get all of these perks and get nice salaries, we don’t need a union” while others are bucket-crabbing with “you make big money, why do you need a union?”, both overlooking the immense amounts of unpaid overtime that are endemic. Then, there’s the push for RTO, which does nothing to benefit employees and would be readily prevented by strong unions.

      • @STUPIDVIPGUY@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        1011 months ago

        it’s very easy to ignore social inequities if you spend all your time working for a shitty company making absolute bank

      • Lev_Astov
        link
        fedilink
        911 months ago

        A lot of companies used to run company towns. Toyota still does, as far as I know. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a return of that sort of thing with real estate prices getting absurd and companies wanting to drive people back into the office.

    • Roboticide
      link
      fedilink
      1111 months ago

      Hah, I actually did that when I first started working for a small company.

      The co-founder also rented out a house he owned as a duplex.

      Actually wasn’t that bad, he charged slightly below market rate, and was pretty attentive. But definitely felt weird and I was happy to move out after a few years. It’s just an unnecessary source of potential drama.

      Now my manager lives there, and has for five years.

    • @meeeeetch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      911 months ago

      The good that comes from that, from the perspective of the boss-landlord is that if your employee-tenants start getting the idea to strike, you control both their income and their shelter, so they reconsider.

      Then you offer on-site housing to your scabs.

    • Melllvar
      link
      fedilink
      311 months ago

      What if you got to lord it over the other tenants and didn’t pay rent?

  • @inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    5411 months ago

    Next up will be these tech companies offering company script to buy things at the company store while paying that rent to the company room. You know, to help transition into the new indentured working environment.