I'm not sure what exactly you're expecting here, even if someone was like "yeah sure let me pick a public fight with the trillion dollar company". Vouch: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38874378
Right now you're not giving any details or other way to confirm your claims besides "I work at Google, trust me bro." There are plenty of people who work at Google that say the opposite, that contractors aren't doing the same work as full time employees.
> What teams are using contract work for the same functions as fill time work?
Are you asking for the organizations, teams, projects, managers to be named? Depending on what you need, that's a lot of exposure and I'm not sure that'll assuage your concerns its "trust me bro". I have seen it in the ******** and ****** organizations.
> What specific work items are being done by both full time and contractors?
Software engineering and design. They're embedded in the teams, there was never a single difference between my TVC/non-TVC ex-coworkers other than their security badge color. They were not brought on for temporary or time-bounded projects.
Before you follow up: I appreciate your skepticism, but it's unclear if it's earnest or a lure. I don't have any legal protection from a trillion dollar company so I can't write a gossip-y essay naming names and giving you case studies, but I'm happy to answer any questions short of that. Like I said yesterday, it's very unclear what specifically what change your mind here
-- especially now that you're claiming "plenty [of Googlers] say it isn't true". There isn't a single comment on this entire article, and it tremendously beggars belief that any Googler would tell you it wasn't true. If I worked at McDonald's, its like a stranger yelling at me that I'm lying because other McDonald's employees said no one has to wear a nametag.
Please consider the emotions you implicitly communicate, it's quite frightening interacting with you given how aggressively you're communicating.
> Google does not directly employ the workers who collect or create the data required for much of its technology, be they the drivers who capture photos for Google Maps’ Street View, the content moderators training YouTube’s filters to catch prohibited material, or the scanners flipping pages to upload the contents of libraries into Google Books.
> Having these two tiers of workers – highly paid full-time Googlers and often low-wage and precarious workers contracted through staffing firms – is “corrosive”, “highly problematic”, and “permissive of exploitation”, the employees said.
While some may be disgusted with the segregation between the two "tiers" of FTEs doing software development and contractors doing manual labor, the fact that the workforce is starkly separated into two different tiers goes to show just how separate these two segments of the workforce really are. Most of the coverage of Google's contracting emphasizes these points: how separate and unequal the contract and full-time workers are.
Now there's an anonymous internet commenter claiming to work at Google insisting that this is not the case - but unwilling to actually specify what team or organization is actually using contract workers for the same functions at FTEs. Is it really "frightening" and "aggressive" that I don't find these anonymous, non-specific allegations more compelling than the writings by people with their real names attached to their claims?
1. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/may/28/a-white-c...
Yet you can't list even one specific example. If you really are seeing this happen, go contact the NLRB or the media and get your observations out there and into the public discussion. If all you're willing to say is "trust me, it happens, but I can't even list any one example of this happening" is it really surprising that you're being met with skepticism?
I did name em btw. Count the asterix. Also its literally every single team. Every single team has TVCs. There's a smol iOS app (think Arts and Culture, but not) I almost took the lead role for that would have had all the contributors be TVCs and I did code review.
This isn't actually naming anything, you're just insisting it's happening everywhere without actually making a specific allegation.
An example of this would be, "full-time employees were being tasked with running performance regression tests for the Google Drive backend, and in 2019 this started to be done by both FTEs and contractors".
A pattern that really engenders skepticism is when people insist that something is incredibly pervasive and common, yet fail to list even one example of it happening. If contract workers are being used to do the same work as FTEs on all teams, you should have a wealth of examples of "X team used FTEs to do Y, and starting at such and such a time they started using contractors to do Y as well".
The recap, NRLB filing linked in this article is not alleging that Cognizant employees are doing the same work as FTEs at google. It's alleging that by having contractors return to the office, and setting other policies like sick leave Google is now a joint employer. The idea that Google is using FTEs and contractors to fulfill the same functions is not supported by the NRLB finding. It's not even a topic that the NRLB is discussing in this document. The NRLB is trying to claim that setting RTO and PTO policies makes Google a joint employer, despite contractors doing separate work from FTEs.
If you're only willing to say "it happens but I can't give any further details or examples" then just say so and be willing to accept that this doesn't meet many people's epistemic thresholds.