The cuts end a yearlong strike by the workers.

Google cuts team of contractors who went on strike::Google previously said the team of YouTube Music contractors were not employees since they were hired by Cognizant.

  • bobs_monkey@lemm.eeEnglish
    334·
    9 months ago

    Sure, but wouldn’t any union busting company not renew the contract

    • ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.worldEnglish
      565·
      9 months ago

      This is the illegal part. Firing them because they unionized.

      It’s almost certain they can prove Google still needs these positions and the firing was motivated by this corrupt motive, not a business decision.

      • Azzu@lemm.eeEnglish
        354·
        9 months ago

        It’s almost certain they can’t. Motives are notoriously hard to prove, and they can just invent a plausible, legal, lie.

        • MiltownClowns@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1414·
          9 months ago

          You know whats a really plausible reason? Every tech company in the world is cutting jobs by double digit pecentages.

          Its insane to think you have any leverage as a contractor for one of the most bloated companies in the history of man kind. They dont even have customer service, why do they need so many people! Stop reinventing texting and hire people to answer phones!

          • YamiYuki@lemmy.kde.socialEnglish
            8·
            9 months ago

            Its insane to think you have any leverage as a contractor for one of the most bloated companies in the history of man kind.

            Don’t know why you’re getting downvoted, but this is the reality.

            • unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
              3·
              9 months ago

              I didn’t downvote, but I briefly thought about it because their first statement is incorrect. Not factually, but the fact that many tech companies are downsizing isn’t something that you could reasonably argue in court as for why these specific positions were eliminated.

              “But your honor, all of the other cool companies are doing it!” isn’t something that would stand up to much scrutiny.

              The bit you quoted was what made me pause, because I agree with you.

      • Anomaline@lemmy.worldEnglish
        82·
        9 months ago

        Google isn’t their employer, it’s the contracting company. The contract not being renewed is inherently a business decision between two busines entities, which is probably going to result in the contracting company laying off the workers but that can’t be directly tied to Google because…Google didn’t hire these people, they hired a company that happened to employ them.

        Is it a loophole? Possibly, depending on the structure of the two businesses in question…but it’s very unlikely to be suddenly declared illegal, it’s been common practice in sectors for a while for basically that reason. Contractors get the shit end of the deal and that needs to be addressed directly instead of pretending they’re already protected by laws.

      • IllNess@infosec.pubEnglish
        21·
        9 months ago

        The team of more than 40 went on strike in February last year, demanding changes to Google’s return-to-work policy.

        Can they prove they are needed if they weren’t needed for over a year?

        “Contracts with our suppliers across the country routinely end on their natural expiry date.”

        Google or Alphabet (or whoever) probably gave Cognizant a contract with an expiration date for YouTube Music. After a year of being on strike, the contract expired. Does that still count as firing?

        Filling offices is a priority to companies. That priority is important enough to Google to not give the right to work remotely to these employees.