Apple, Google, Bringing Low-Pay Support Employees In-House

jfruh writes One of the knocks against Silicon Valley giants as "job creators" is that the companies themselves often only hire high-end employees; support staff like security guards and janitors are contracted out to staffing agencies and receive lower pay and fewer benefits, even if they work on-site full time. That now seems to be changing, with Apple and Google putting security guards on their own payroll.

Comments

Good.

[Anonymous Coward]

Staffing agencies are scum. Pretty much modern day slave-traders.

I applaud any move to cut out the corrupt middleman from things like this. Staffing agencies are just that - corrupt labour pimps.

Re: Good.

[Anonymous Coward]

I worked for Apple as a low-fat contractor. Yeah, the cafe people are Apple but everyone eating in the cafeteria aren't. Team Leads, "Trainers", and a few other people are Apple, and out numbered 35:1 if not more by contractors, and it runs like shit. Miserable job. My specific department Trainer didn't know anything and we couldn't talk to each other. You sat there with and ESD strapping you to a table. You repair Apple products for next to nothing. It's crap.

Re:Good.

[cusco]

I can pretty much guarantee that the reason for this is the difficulty hiring competent guard staff in the SFO area. Silicon Valley salaries have have inflated the local pay scale enough that security companies are having trouble finding people willing to work for crap wages and still have an IQ above room temperature. The way contracts for the really large companies are generally done is the security vendor will offer to cover staffing for all their sites throughout the country for a certain price. Too many management types will automatically go for the lowest bidder, and competition for the major contracts is fierce. Of course the salescritters will always low-ball the price, so the local security managers are stuck trying to pinch pennies while providing the staffing levels contracted for. Apple and Google are going to skim off the cream of the available guard staff, leaving the dregs for the security contractors to dispatch to their other customers.

Re:What for?

[phantomfive]

This is why.

"Google, which has been under rising pressure along with other tech companies to release diversity data"

And here:

"Put simply, Google is not where we want to be when it comes to diversity,"

Now, by in-sourcing their "low-pay employees," they are instantly closer to where they want to be.

Amazing that this was ever contracted out

[Todd Knarr]

It always amazed me that tech companies would contract this work out in the first place. Security has virtually unrestricted access to every area of the building (if they don't actually have it, they control the equipment that grants it). Janitorial has similar access, in fact probably more since people might find it odd that a Security badge was accessing an area at night but Janitorial is practically expected to be in there every night to empty the trash. With as easy as it is to gather up loose papers, plug keyloggers or hacking devices into computers (If you epoxy closed all the USB ports, where are you going to plug the keyboard and mouse in? And if the ports for the keyboard and mouse are usable what's to stop someone from plugging a dongle with a built-in hub in and plugging the keyboard/mouse into that?) and photograph whiteboards, why would any company that values intellectual property allow contract employees (who they can't control and can't screen) access? I'd have all that stuff in-house first thing, and pay the people well enough that if approached about espionage their first reaction will be to smile and nod and make all the right noises and then immediately report the details to the company because the offer isn't worth losing their paycheck and benefits over.