Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft's Treatment of Google Defectors

Miguel de Icaza (Note, this Miguel is not the Ximian developer, just someone whose small life is fulfilled by trolling under someone else's name) writes "Here is a story revealing just how threatened Microsoft is by Google. While senior partners can expect the full chair experience, some lowly staffers who are putting in their notice are being escorted off campus immediately. Why? Because they've put in their notice to join Google. In Microsoft's eyes, Google is Enemy No. 1. Anyone leaving Redmond for the search leader is a threat. Not because they'll scurry around collecting company secrets — as if Google's interested in Microsoft's '90s-era technologies. Departing employees, however, might tell other 'Softies how much better Google is. If an employee is leaving for Amazon.com or another second-tier employer which doesn't make Microsoft so paranoid, they'll probably serve out the traditional two weeks of unproductive wrapping up. So if you're planning on leaving Microsoft for Google, pack up your belongings and say goodbye to friends ahead of time. There'll be no cake and two weeks of paid slacking for you."

18 of 572 comments (clear)

  1. not that uncommon by yagu · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you're leaving these days it's not uncommon to get escorted to the door... and it's not uncommon to be a perp walk, which sucks. It undermines the fabric of trust in the workforce generally and damages individual psyche specifically. Microsoft isn't unique in this regard, though the article does seem to indicate it is Google-specific.

    If it is Google-specific it underscores Microsoft's pettiness, and maybe a little stupidity. They should enforce a consistent policy. Unless an employee has shown himself to be a bad seed, treat him (or her) with respect.

    I experienced the perp walk (layoff) after 21 years with qwest. It has garnered nothing but ill will since. The net balance of this kind of treatment is surely negative. You can handle this kind of policy with dignity. Most don't.

    While I doubt too many Google employees are leaving for the crumbling Monarchy that is Microsoft, I wouldn't be surprised if Google has similar policies and procedures.

  2. Microsoft is simply bland.. by Ckwop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have never worked for Microsoft and to be honest, I'd probably never want to. I think the key problem for Microsoft is that nothing they do is exciting anymore.

    I think Vista has really damaged Microsoft. Not in terms of revenue, since a sale of Windows XP is still a sale for Microsoft. No, the damage is in morale. Vista was an absolute disaster for morale. They worked for a couple of years only to ditch it and start again from the Windows 2003 Server source-code. Nothing they put in to Vista was in anyway something you can get developers energised about. Every feature had nightmarish committees which destroyed any hope of motivation. They even developed anti-features like SecurePath that nobody cares about.

    I read somewhere that Microsoft developers write something like 1,000 lines of code a year. Last-year, I contributed around forty times that to our source control at work. When you're paid so much to do so little - that has to destroy morale too. Most developers I know like to work.

    Vista is a symptom of a much deeper problem. Microsoft doesn't know how to be sexy. it doesn't now how to to be secure and it doesn't know how to please it's users. Worst of all, it doesn't know how to make it's huge base of developers happy!

    All of this makes Google a very attractive place. If all your talent walks right of your door, it isn't too long until there is no way whatsoever to fix any of the problems I've just mentioned.

    Put more succinctly, Microsoft sucks and Google rocks.

    Simon.

    1. Re:Microsoft is simply bland.. by Valen0 · · Score: 5, Informative
      --
      -Valen
  3. Paid slacking by modelint · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually, getting escorted out the door gets you two weeks of paid slacking at home! I would consider it an insult if I weren't important enough to be shown the door in a paranoid fury.

  4. NOT Miguel de Icaza by balster+neb · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just to clarify, the submitter is not the real Miguel de Icaza. The real one uses the Slashdot ID miguel.

  5. Re:what's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its not SOP. I've been through many companies, not a single one treated me or other employees this way. If someone wants to damage the company, why would they give you a chance to throw you out? They'll just do it before they put in their notice. Respect your employees and they'll treat you in kind.

  6. Re:what's the big deal? by Tom · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, it isn't.

    Everyone who intends to take anything with them is probably smart enough to make copies before telling you they're leaving. Likewise, any damage they might do can already be set up.

    The only situation where being escorted off is when the company fires someone, or when he resigns surprisingly (including to himself) in a fit of anger. In any other situation, anything you're trying to protect yourself from has either already happened, or won't happen even if you just let him go peacefully.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  7. Re:what's the big deal? by lukas84 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here in Switzerland, 2 months notice MINIMUM is required by law. Most companies write up 3 months for most regular jobs, and 6+ months for senior/executive positions.

    And most of the time, you'll spend this time wrapping up your work. It's HIGHLY unusual to be suspended immediately - usually only if you stole company goods or something like that.

    When i've switched jobs, i always spent the time productively, completing documentation, instructing my follow-up, etc. pp.

    American working culture always looks very strange to me :)

  8. Re:what's the big deal? by MoonBuggy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But the story is that MS is not doing this for security, they're doing it to prevent 'defectors' taking others with them. I really can't even begin to get inside the thought process of whoever had this idea - who seriously thinks "Hmm, good employees are leaving because they think another company is a more pleasant place to work, we'd better make sure the secret doesn't get out" rather than "Hmm, good employees are leaving because they think another company is a more pleasant place to work, we'd better see if we can find out what we're doing wrong and perhaps work on fixing it".

  9. Re:what's the big deal? by Pensacola+Tiger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So Microsoft is now treating employees the same way they treat customers?

  10. Re:what's the big deal? by The+Second+Horseman · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's not so much a working culture. It's more like watching one of those nature documentaries where the slower and weaker animals are getting run down and eaten, or wander into quicksand and drown. If you're lucky. In some areas, it's positively Dickensian.

  11. I HAVE IT!!! by denzacar · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why don't you just lie?

    Like... you know... when they ask you... you tell them that you are going to work for McDonald's, or that you are dieing from AIDS or something.

    My favourite would be a rare form of Ebola virus. Make sure to cough from time to time.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  12. Re:what's the big deal? by DeBattell · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Unfortunately this is not always true. I worked in a computing lab at the University of Tennessee in the 90's. We had a girl who came in to do backups every evening. She put in her notice one day, served it out, still making the backups. After she left, she logged in with the still-unchanged root password and trashed our systems. And it turned out the last few "backups" she made were blank. I guess she was pissed about something; we never firgured out what.

  13. Re:what's the big deal? by dotgain · · Score: 5, Funny

    My guess he's self employed and has split personality disorder.

  14. Unproductive 2 weeks of wrapping up???!!! by bartwol · · Score: 5, Insightful

    they'll probably serve out the traditional two weeks of unproductive wrapping up

    Said like a lousy manager, or one who doesn't appreciate what people actually do, or somebody who never worked in a large enough organization to appreciate the true cost of attrition, or I don't know what...

    Excepting the departures of Truly Useless People, those last two weeks are somebody's last chance to find out that which you don't know about that which you are about to inherit. I am so sick of watching stupid managers and stupid successors squander that invaluable last chance because they act like scorned girlfriends or just don't understand the true value of even people who would leave, and the undocumented knowledge they carry in their heads.

    I've never met a leaving person who wouldn't be helpful in his own succession. Most, in fact, are incredulous as to how little anybody seems to care about the invaluable knowledge they are walking away with, and how much more difficult their successor's lives will be for the ignorance.

    Shape up, managers and everybody else. Those defectors leaving your ranks should be more valuable to you in those last two weeks than in any other two weeks of their employ.

  15. Re:what's the big deal? by vidarh · · Score: 5, Informative
    Of course comparing it with involuntary servitude is ridiculous. It's a contract. As long as there is mutual consideration, calling it involuntary makes no more sense than calling any other contract term involuntary. Certainly noone can force you to serve out the time, but you can expect consequences if you don't, just as with violating any other contract term.

    Note that in all countries I'm aware of that have longer notice periods a) it can be waived by mutual agreement, b) you can usually remove it from contracts as long as you provide sufficient consideration - typically that consideration must be greater to the employee as it's assumed the employee negotiates from a position of weakness unless it's a very high level position, c) it's mutual - that is, you have legal protection to ensure you at the very least get paid for the full notice period even if you get fired, and often to guarantee you actually is guaranteed the right to go to work during that period (though it's getting more common for workplaces to negotiate for some types of employees to leave immediately while still paying them).

    In Norway the typical notice period is 3 months, and an employment contract that says elsewhere needs a LOT of care to be valid unless it's part time/fixed term contract or seasonal work. Basically, the employer would need to offer to compensate you for it, and just offering to pay for it regardless likely wouldn't be enough, as you have right to work during the notice period, not just to get paid.

    And while certainly some of the motivation is gone while serving out your notice period, I've personally never seen someone be unprofessional about it - people do stick around and do their jobs properly, because it's what they were contracted to do. As the other poster I find US working practices completely bizarre.

  16. Re:what's the big deal? by Chapter80 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    When deciding whether to terminate someone immediately or let them serve out their two weeks, obviously there's an issue of trust (and as you said, they could have already taken stuff). But it's ALSO an issue (more importantly) of the perception of the SURVIVORS.

    By escorting someone out, it could be an intentional signal to the other employees that you take this rivalry seriously. Or by letting them work the two weeks, it could be a signal that you are employee-friendly and there are no hard feelings. But the main concern really needs to be about how the remaining employees feel. There should be little concern about how the departing employee feels - except that it's often not a good idea to make enemies.

  17. Re:what's the big deal? by Cairnarvon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Switzerland has a lower unemployment rate than the US. 3.3% compared to 4.7%.