Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Tops 100 Best Places To Work

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the perks-galore dept.

Google 317

inetsee writes "Fortune Magazine's annual '100 Best Companies to Work For' list is out, and Google topped the list in their debut appearance. Some highlights of the benefits of working for Google that caught my eye were the free gourmet meals and the massages. The chance to spend 20% of your time working on your own personal projects also sounds very appealing. Of course, with resumes rolling in at the rate of thousands a day, the competition is fierce."

cancel ×

317 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Check out Google's wrongdoing! (1, Flamebait)

CensorsAreBadPeople (1034980) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517072)

It's right here: http://malfy.org/ [malfy.org]

What about the 100 worst places? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517092)

How come we never hear about that?

Re:What about the 100 worst places? (3, Insightful)

Oddscurity (1035974) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517104)

Because whoever'd publish such a list would get hit with a defamation suit within the hour?

Re:What about the 100 worst places? (5, Interesting)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517480)

Because whoever'd publish such a list would get hit with a defamation suit within the hour?

Sue away...

http://www.wanderlist.com/worstUScompanies [wanderlist.com]

Re:What about the 100 worst places? (-1, Offtopic)

The OPTiCIAN (8190) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517850)

Hmm. Paypal isn't in that list. They've broken my account such that I can't use my existing account, can't sign up for a new one, can't get responses out of their technical support. They're the worst I've ever dealt with - Sony Online comes in second for me. They complete lost an order of mine and disappeared the payment.

Re:What about the 100 worst places? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517340)

Want to take a tour?

Re:What about the 100 worst places? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517374)

Want to take a tour?

A three hour tour?

What about the 100 worst places?-"/." (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517522)

"Want to take a tour?"

Do you think Taco would allow it?

Re:What about the 100 worst places? (0, Offtopic)

Salvance (1014001) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517430)

As a teen, I worked at a garbage dump and gas station, and a friend worked as a nuclear waste cleanup technician at TMI. I'd definitely classify those amongst the bottom 100.

My years working 100 hour weeks as a Management Consultant at Accenture seemed like comparitive walk in the park. These lists are alway so subjective anyway.

Re:What about the 100 worst places? (3, Funny)

Coucho (1039182) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517436)

How come we never hear about that?
Chances are you're working at it

Re:What about the 100 worst places? (1)

TibbonZero (571809) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517476)

I think there was a TV show a while ago (don't really watch TV often and just saw it for a few minutes in a hotel room) about shitty and odd jobs. Late Night with Dave Atel also i believe had some rather odd jobs featured on it, including the guy that has to clean up hotel rooms after suicides.

Re:What about the 100 worst places? (2, Insightful)

Andrew Kismet (955764) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517494)

I think there was also the job of people who had to clean the hulls of boats, both modern and old. Cleaning the hull of a wooden or steel boat (as opposed to plastic or polysomething) must be horrible. Yay for barnacles.

Re:What about the 100 worst places? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517774)

How come we never hear about that?

#1 on the list: Whatever corp just had a worker go really postal.

Intersting that Apple is missing - (1)

vought (160908) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517102)

Competitive pay, gourmet food, good location, great benefits. Where's the fruit company?

Re:Intersting that Apple is missing - (1, Informative)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517202)

Who cares! Apparently Microsoft gives out "Free grocery delivery, valet parking, and a dollar-for-dollar match of employee charitable contributions up to $12,000" (as well as paying for Health insurance, which apparently Google doesn't).

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompani es/2007/benefits/unusual.html [cnn.com]

Re:Intersting that Apple is missing - (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517204)

I haven't met any Google folk, only heard of those who've been interviewed but I have met some Apple folk: They remind me a lot about what I hated from a large company.

I'm sure it's a great place but the fanboys would never say anything negative. They can't. The brainwashing starts early :P

I've worked for a Fortune 40 company and a small business.

Since HR people tend to recruit like-minded people (3, Funny)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517106)

Well, since the recruitment process is a machine, just write your resume like a robot. GoogleBot's sure to pick you then!

Re:Since HR people tend to recruit like-minded peo (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517140)

I just felt a shudder at the thought of an SEO "optimising" my cv.

Re:Since HR people tend to recruit like-minded peo (2, Funny)

Amazing Quantum Man (458715) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517344)

What? Just put all sorts of porn META tags in, and you're set!

I want to work at Goolge (4, Funny)

ghaltmann (998674) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517110)

I want to work for Goolge too. As long as it doesn't get caught in my eye.

OK I know that was bad.

Re:I want to work at Goolge (1, Informative)

quarrel (194077) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517586)

A Stanford business Professor remarked to me that Google offers a day off a week to work on your own projects, but that that day is normally Sunday.

(Many many people at Google, at least in the Bay Area, work incredibly long hours)

--Q

Very small often == very good. (4, Insightful)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517134)

Find a good small company (~20 people) where you fit in well. You'll have much more flexibility since the Top isn't all that high in a small company. Or even start your own. Many of the companies worth considering aren't even on the radar yet.


-b.

Compuglobalhypermeganet (5, Funny)

Freaky Spook (811861) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517226)


I tried starting my own company, but some geek guy in glasses bought me out.

Now my pencils are all broken.

Re:Compuglobalhypermeganet (1)

shades66 (571498) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517328)

well the geek guy didn't get rich by writing a lot of checks!

Re:Very small often == very good. (4, Insightful)

metlin (258108) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517250)

Or find a small group within a company where you fit well, and you will feel much the same.

Companies are not all the same on the inside, and some groups are better than the others within a company.

I work in the R&D division of a telecom services company - and our group is very small but is great to work with. For the most part, we are encouraged to think up cool things with technology that we think are worth exploring and are given the opportunity to work with them.

Alternatively, you could start your own company and work with a company that you already know (i.e. consultant and consultancy services etc).

Not every group in a big "good" company is necessarily good, and not all departments in a "not-so-good" are necessarily not-so-good.

You need to feel comfortable with the group and the people you work for, else there is no point, no matter how amazing a company maybe rated.

Re:Very small often == very good. (2, Insightful)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517268)

Or find a small group within a company where you fit well, and you will feel much the same.

Agreed, though the small groups within companies are still more subject to orders from on high and blanket company policies than bona-fide small organizations.

-b.

Re:Very small often == very good. (2, Insightful)

metlin (258108) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517352)

True, but that becomes a double-edged sword -- you get some benefits being a part of a bigger organization that a smaller organization can't afford (good health insurance, stock options and 401k plans, long term security (well, depends on the company) etc). Of course, on the flip side, like you said, you are still subject to blanket company policies and the like.

Once again, it would boil down to the group/company in question, rather than any one place.

Re:Very small often == very good. (2, Insightful)

radtea (464814) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517630)

good health insurance, stock options and 401k plans, long term security

For those of us outside the U.S., the health insurance thing isn't such a big issue. Not having to deal with an insurance market where for some unfathomable reason health insurance is tied to employment also makes it a whole lot easier to start your own company if you are outside the U.S.

Stock options are generally better with smaller companies, although they can work out for big as well. Pension plans aren't looking as good these days, with the transition away from defined benefit plans and the unfunded liability that some large companies are facing with growing retiree populations.

Long-term security can only be found in having a skill-set and professional attitude that will make you continuously employable. Some companies may be a little slower to lay people off than others, but none of them offer anything that could properly be called job security. But a good education and professional skill-set can certainly offer employment security, which is as much as anyone can ask for.

Re:Very small often == very good. (1)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517664)

Not having to deal with an insurance market where for some unfathomable reason health insurance is tied to employment also makes it a whole lot easier to start your own company if you are outside the U.S.

Exactly why I think that nationalized or state-owned health insurance would actually help true capitalism. It would remove another impediment in the path of startup companies. BTW - it's actually not that difficult to find even in expensive states. Be prepared to pay $2-300/mo in the more expensive places (read: NJ), but it isn't unobtainable.

-b.

Re:Very small often == very good. (2, Informative)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517696)

You mean like here in New Zealand, where a component of our Income Tax actually goes to a State Owned health insurance provider? We get injured at all, and the government's public health insurance steps in and pays all the bills. Unless you work for a healthcare provider, then your employer forks out for it.

Re:Very small often == very good. (2, Funny)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517722)

You mean like here in New Zealand, where a component of our Income Tax actually goes to a State Owned health insurance provider? We get injured at all, and the government's public health insurance steps in and pays all the bills.

Yeah, that kind of system...

Re:Very small often == very good. (2)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517254)

see i've had the exact oppersite experience. i've found small business owners to be petty, penny pinching assholes even though they are making money hand over fist and paying me a pitence. they never know when to just stay out of your work and constantly complicate it with their own little idotic ideas

Re:Very small often == very good. (1)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517318)

ve found small business owners to be petty, penny pinching assholes even though they are making money hand over fist and paying me a pitence. they never know when to just stay out of your work and constantly complicate it with their own little idotic ideas

Then again, it's better to have one or two levels of clowns above you than six or seven levels of the same :D

I think it ultimately comes down to the individual company. I've just found small organizations less annoying than large ones. This may be because I'm an anarchist at heart :D

-b.

Very small often != very good benefits (2, Interesting)

HaeMaker (221642) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517294)

If you are looking for benefits specifically, most starups and small companies can not afford top-tier health insurance and dental insurance, and usually you have to kick in a whole lot for your percentage.

37signals? (1)

Oddscurity (1035974) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517366)

37signals [37signals.com] seems to be just such a company.

Re:Very small often == very good. (1)

dxlts (1037812) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517532)

I'm not making any blanket statements about small companies, but my worst job ever was with a small company. The company was just about as small as you can get: me and 2 bosses. That's it. Both bosses were pushy, abusive, unethical weasels with hugely overinflated egos, who didn't mind stepping on people in order to get ahead. As a result, I was the 3rd or 4th programmer they'd had in as many years, and there were several more that followed when I quit abruptly after 8 months on the job. I know several of the others who worked there, and they all unanimously agree it was the worst job ever. Even the minimum wage jobs I had before starting my programming career were better than that job.

Like I said, I'm not making any blanket statements. I'm just pointing out that smaller is not always better (yes, I understand that that's not what the parent comment said, so don't flame me). For one thing, it's a helluva lot harder to distance yourself from the jerks when there are only 20 people in the whole company. Big companies have many drawbacks as well, but it's fairly easy to just transfer to another department when/if things get bad.

Re:Very small often == very good. (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517536)

It depends. Family companies can be absolute hell if you are not in the family. It's really annoying to have your pay delayed for five weeks becuase the payroll has gone into the daughters 21st party and have nothing you can do about it apart from wait or give up on the money and leave. Sometimes a boss in that situation will expect ridiculous hours for no extra pay and horrible working conditions (industrial and radiation safety in my case) because that is the way they work themselves - and they forget that the compensation for extra effort makes it into their pockets as owner and not into the pockets of those on wages.

Re:Very small often == very good. (2, Interesting)

svunt (916464) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517756)

Agreed. I've been working mostly for big corporations over the past decade, and I was ready to slit my own throat, so hard did it suck. Now I work at a 35 person music exporter, I'm actually TRUSTED to do my job without supervision, KPIs, etc. It's flexible, everyone knows everyone, we drink together, work together, play together. The pay's about 20% more than a big company would ever pay me, and I haven't worn shoes to work once this summer. Google sounds awesome, but frankly, I like being the nerd at work. I don't need to be surrounded by them.

How can I find out more about this "Google"? (4, Funny)

Eternal Vigilance (573501) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517158)

Sounds like a trip to the library is in order before I submit my resume!

Thanks for the info!

Google in the top 100? (1)

Hexstream (892806) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517160)

The "duh" tag could prove useful.

Google... (5, Insightful)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517164)

20% of time working on personal projects

Fine, but if you're working in a smaller, less demanding company, you might have that time free, so you can work on the projects without the company knowing about it. Far better to market an idea independently than under the auspices of a large employer. At least you have the opportunity for profits far beyond a salary that way.

gourmet meals, massages

Just give me a decent salary, TYVM. If I want a massage, I can go to a masseur after hours. If I'm working in a city, I can pretty much order whatever I want to (and can afford) for lunch.

-b.

Re:Google... (5, Funny)

lowrydr310 (830514) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517210)

$20 says the Google massage doesn't include a 'happy ending'...

Re:Google... (2, Funny)

sokoban (142301) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517258)

For an $80 tip, it just might.

Re:Google... (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517266)

Of course not, the entire building is no smoking.

Re:Google... (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517922)

the entire building is no smoking.

which is a good thing in my book.

Re:Google... (1)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517290)

20% of time working on personal projects Fine, but if you're working in a smaller, less demanding company, you might have that time free, so you can work on the projects without the company knowing about it. Far better to market an idea independently than under the auspices of a large employer. At least you have the opportunity for profits far beyond a salary that way.

Well, you can still kinda do that at larger employers too. I work at a place with 9000 staff, and I've got little to do while everyone else is still away on holiday. But then, if you work on a project at work and make money off it, chances are that they invoke that IP ownership clause that's no doubt in your contract, and you lose all the money you just made, as well as the chance to make any further money off it.

Re:Google... (1)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517342)

Well, you can still kinda do that at larger employers too. I work at a place with 9000 staff, and I've got little to do while everyone else is still away on holiday. But then, if you work on a project at work and make money off it, chances are that they invoke that IP ownership clause that's no doubt in your contract, and you lose all the money you just made, as well as the chance to make any further money off it.

They'd have to prove that it was done with work equipment and on the clock. I'd refuse to sign (and have in the past crossed out) any clauses in a contract that make claim on designs done on *my* time which aren't directly related to the work which the employer is doing.

Actually, I was talking more about the fact that I doubt that working for Google is a 9-5 or even an 8-6 job. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

-b.

Re:Google... (1)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517372)

They'd have to prove that it was done with work equipment and on the clock. I'd refuse to sign (and have in the past crossed out) any clauses in a contract that make claim on designs done on *my* time which aren't directly related to the work which the employer is doing. Actually, I was talking more about the fact that I doubt that working for Google is a 9-5 or even an 8-6 job. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Ah. I was referring to any work done on "downtime" at work - I have once had a company attempt to bully me into issuing them ownership of code written on my equipment on my time, but they backed off when I told them where they could shove it.

I don't know what sort of hours Google would have, so I can't comment on that.

Re:Google... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517304)

> Just give me a decent salary, TYVM. If I want a massage, I can go to a masseur after hours.

And get one with a happy ending!

Re:Google... (4, Informative)

nwbvt (768631) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517390)

"Fine, but if you're working in a smaller, less demanding company, you might have that time free, so you can work on the projects without the company knowing about it. Far better to market an idea independently than under the auspices of a large employer. At least you have the opportunity for profits far beyond a salary that way."

Check the terms of your employment again. Most likely your employer owns rights to anything you produce while they are paying your salary, unless it absolutely has nothing to do with their line of work (and even then, you are going to want to get a lawyer to make sure everything is by the book). Generally speaking hiding another job on the side from your employer is a good way to get your ass sued.

I disagree. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517514)

(Disclaimer: IANAL) Unless you've signed some sort of non-compete agreement, I believe there's a general rule you can follow:

If you do it on company property and/or using company resources, it's theirs. If you do it outside of the workplace and without using company resources, it's yours.

As an aside, I would SO not hire the grandparent poster.

Re:Google... (3, Interesting)

MarcoAtWork (28889) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517490)

If I'm working in a city, I can pretty much order whatever I want to (and can afford) for lunch


try doing that as a vegan/veggie and you'll see that having a vegan/veggie-friendly cafeteria onsite would be great.

In my opinion the only big minuses with working for google are that

#1 it's in the valley (plenty of nicer places to live in the US/Canada, of course if you live to work this doesn't really matter)

#2 everybody and their dog is applying to work there, which means that the odds of the company culture deteriorating are not insignificant (not to mention that the bigger the company the more likely that it will become a series of fiefdoms and so on)

#3 given #2 the interview process is way way way way too convoluted and drawn out, but that's just to be expected with the sheer volume of resumes they receive: the downside is that it will turn away a lot of really qualified folks, since in general people at a certain level of competency/employability won't feel like putting up with that (since on average they'll have plenty of other companies vying for their services and honestly, you wouldn't want to hire somebody that's just going through the motions for a few months at their current job just waiting for your call, would you? that wouldn't be exactly the type of ethics you ought to go for IMHO).

Re:Google... (4, Insightful)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517556)

In addition to the parent post's points, I'd add four more reasons why I wouldn't want to work there:
  1. It's a huge organization, where you're a cog in the wheel.
  2. Part of the point of the interview process is for the interviewee to judge whether the potential employers seem nice, and know what they're doing. If the interview process involves lots of monkey business with no objectively proven reliability, then that's a big minus for me. For me, the monkey business category includes handwriting tests, polygraph tests, contrived interview situations ("there's a snake in the trash can! just kidding!"), as well as Google's puzzles and goofy computer personality tests. (A homebrewed test is not a valid way to identify smart people. My mother works in the testing industry doing statistical modeling, and she considers even the professionally constructed IQ tests to be pretty poor.)
  3. Heinous traffic in Silicon Valley.
  4. Insane housing prices in Silicon Valley.

Re:Google... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517718)

I never notice the traffic. I take the company shuttle from the east bay. I can nap or read. When I get a laptop, I'll be able to go online during the commute via the shuttle wifi.

Re:Google... (1)

Daverd (641119) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517590)

Just give me a decent salary, TYVM. If I want a massage, I can go to a masseur after hours. If I'm working in a city, I can pretty much order whatever I want to (and can afford) for lunch.

If they give you income, and then you spend that income on massages and food, then you're paying income tax on it. If they give you the massages and food directly and cut your salary a little less than the cost of the massages and food, you both come out ahead. In addition, since your income is lower, you'll be paying slightly less income tax on the rest of your income. Of course, this is only beneficial if you'd be spending your money on massages and food anyway. Food I can see, massages maybe not so much.

Re:Google... (1)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517610)

Huh? What bizarre country decreases your overall tax rate just because you don't earn as much? You'll be paying the exact same percentile in Income Tax whether you earn $10K or $40K, surely?

Re:Google... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517670)

It's called "progressive tax" and it's used to greater or lesser degrees in basically every country on the planet.

Re:Google... (1)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517780)

It's called "progressive tax" and it's used to greater or lesser degrees in basically every country on the planet.

Yeah, I get the whole progressive tax thing, but he writes as if you'll be paying less tax overall as a percentile of total income, whereas under any sane taxation scheme, the only way that would be possible is if the "reduction" would result in you being pushed over or under a taxation rate bracket. In this country, even then it would only affect the amount by which you're over the bracket - taxes are fixed up to a bracket and any amount past that is a higher rate, until the next bracket and so all. I can't think of any fair way except that one to institute progressive tax.

Re:Google... (2, Insightful)

megaditto (982598) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517808)

You can either get 10 (ten) massages from your employer for free, or they increase your salary accordingly, then you pay taxes on that get yourself 6 (six) massages.

You call that "health insurance", and it becomes yet another way to cheat the system, you see.

Like calling your huge caslte, with an entertainment park, a zoo and whatever else a "raunch" and pay no property taxes like Michael Jackson, or flying on corporate jets rather than a personal jets, or getting stocks rather than cash salary and paying 15% tax on that instead of 40%....

Re:Google... (1)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517824)

That actually works over there? Heck, here they'd bill us what the Inland Revenue calls "Fringe Benefits Tax" which is more than just paying the equivelant in Income Tax!

Personal projects are not just about money... (1)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517684)

or business opportunities. They foster personal development and exploration. If you only ever learn or do the stuff you need to do the job, then you're far from likely to bring new ideas & thinking to the table. I spend a lot of time doing personal projects (on my own time) and they often have some spin-off benefit at work. For instance, I recently wrote some software that was cranking approx 50k interrupts per second. At work there was some concern as to whether a similar processor could crank 10k interrupts per second and I could immediately provide some input. In another project, someone was looking for a way to do some test configuration. Someone else had been playing with Python and suggested that some cool python features would be useful.

Large companies. (5, Informative)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517178)

Fortune has a tendancy to concentrate on public companies, since that's their industry, pimping public companies. The vast majority of companies in the US are privately held, and under 1000 employees. I notice that none on this list are less than 1000 employees. They even have the gall to call those "small" companies.

Re:Large companies. (1)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517238)

The vast majority of companies in the US are privately held, and under 1000 employees. I notice that none on this list are less than 1000 employees. They even have the gall to call those "small" companies.

And the best way to find such a small company to work for is sometimes to open the phonebook (or use a yellow pages site) and start making calls and sending resumes. Look at their websites as well, a lot of companies show open positions on web sites without advertising on the bigger job boards like Monster (though they may use CL).

-b.

Re:Large companies. (1)

ZmaniacZ (535338) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517468)

#13 on the list is a private company where the corporate office is maybe 40 people. It's a small supermarket chain in Northern California. No, I' don't know what they're doing on the list either.

Re:Large companies. (1)

Joe5678 (135227) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517530)

Fortune's requirements are that they have to survey 400 of your employees, so that pretty much puts all small companies out of the running.

yehp (4, Funny)

User 956 (568564) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517184)

Some highlights of the benefits of working for Goolge that caught my eye were the free gourmet meals and the massages.

Sounds like you got a happy ending with that gourmet meal and massage.

Re:yehp (1)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517422)

I'm personally surprised you didn't comment on the "caught my eye" bit. Too easy?

Goolge? (2, Funny)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517230)

One of the biggest advantages of working for Slashdot is you don't have to know how to spell Google.

(I hate spelling nazis, but crap, we are talking about EDITORS here...)

Re:Goolge? (2, Insightful)

metlin (258108) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517288)

(I hate spelling nazis, but crap, we are talking about EDITORS here...)


Editors? On Slashdot, that word does not mean what you think it does. :)

Not a misspelling (1)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517300)

Not a misspelling. It's Google's word for the Google gulag ;-)

Re:Goolge? (2, Insightful)

vistic (556838) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517646)

Give them a break... they have to proofread/edit about a full page's worth of text a DAY! And that's without a spellchecker (uhhh... apparently)!

I mean, they're overworked as it is!

This will probably not last (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517270)

I've worked at a technology company that had an on-demand gourmet chef, free massages, a concierge, free snacks and pop and very similar perks. Once somebody realized this was wasting a bunch of money and that people would work there even if there wasn't a gourmet chef, they dropped the perks all together. Alot of people then got angry about this and left and then things returned to normal. It is still one of the best places to work. Google has alot of money and they haven't had a chance to be taught a lesson in frugality. Once shareholders start demanding the impossible and they can not meet these demands with their profits from advertising only, you better believe that gourmet chef's job will be the first to go!

Re:This will probably not last (1)

nelsonal (549144) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517826)

I agree you're probably right, but don't know if it's that wise. I'm using my observations of Microsoft where a convenience store's drink selection was available to programmers and was removed a few years ago. Obs 1-Most programmers are salaried at MS so the longer they stay the lower your total compensation costs. Obs-2 Programmers stayed longer with the free drinks. Obs 3-The drinks were far cheaper than paying for an extra hour of a programmer's salary (even if they sounded like tremendous waste to investors). I've found at other firms the time savings from having employees eat at the good subsidized cafeteria vs going off site every day, is well worth the minimal cost of operating it. I doubt the chef is cooking all the meals so most of the labor isn't as expensive as he is.

Re:This will probably not last (2, Interesting)

jorghis (1000092) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517924)

Are you certain of that? I havent been near the Microsoft campus in over a year, but my friend who currently works there insists that they still have them.

Personally I can see the logic behind free food more easily than I can see the logic behind free drinks. I wont stay at work an extra hour for a coke, but I will stay if I can get a free meal by doing so.

Can anyone say "dot com"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517278)

While I don't mean to be harsh on Google such practices were common during the dot com heyday. My company even had a beer cart on fridays. That's all gone now that the company has to meet earnings. While Google is doing fine now I'm not sure they can sustain their ideal ways indefinitely. Enjoy it while it lasts.

Intel, where are you? (1)

taugesag (1007065) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517298)

2006 may not be a year of Intel

A Shark-jumpesque event? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517334)

Dang. I was just thinking of going to work there before this...

Best place, despite worst pay (1, Interesting)

protactin (206817) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517380)

Google appears to be somewhere in the 91st to last range in terms of pay [cnn.com] .

Those free lunches must really keep their employees happy..

Re:Best place, despite worst pay (5, Insightful)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517398)

If you actually looked at Google's entry in the main index, you'd see that the reason they aren't on the pay table is because they refused to disclose that info. Don't believe me? Look here [cnn.com]

Re:Best place, despite worst pay (1)

protactin (206817) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517456)

Doh. Indeed!

Re:Best place, despite worst pay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517432)

From what I've heard, they don't pay their network people or sysadmins very much.

Though as this is based on average pay, I wonder how many network folk they have? I guess a lot given the size/number of datacentres.

Google interview, odd (1)

Triode (127874) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517382)

I was interviewed by google three times, then told told me to #$%^ off (well,
ok, just that they would never again contact me)...

I think their job hunting ideals are odd at best. For instance, I have a
BS in EE an MS in Physics and I took all of the courses to get a Doctorate
in computer engineering. I think I know a little, but ok, I have been beat down
and humbled by my profs before, so I know on the scope of things I do not really
know jack, but still, suffice it to say, I know a few things about HW and SW.
What was odd is the following, I was interviewing for sysadmin, I know: with my
background?, but I worked my way through college and for an international company
as a sysadmin. The interview kept getting deeper and deeper on odd levels. We
started to chat about algorithms and soon it was "please derive this recursion
algorithm from first principles" ok, I did it (I took a few algorithm classes)
but I kept thinking why would a unix sysadmin need this? It was kind of strange...
I think with the three interviews I derived 6 sorting algorithms for them. Uh,
right, cuz I lost a file on the main server and I need to find it quickly? None
of the guys asked anything about processes, memory management, OS speeds, pipes,
networking, etc. It was all searching and basic math/algorithms.

I know it has been covered here before, but I think if you apply for Google you should
apply for something you _don't_ want to do, perhaps it will turn out ok...

Re:Google interview, odd (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517582)

That's "human resources" everywhere - always interviewing for an earlier job they have a handle on and not the current position.

Re:Google interview, odd (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517618)

And maybe the correct answer was to tell them that the sysadmin job doesn't need to derive algorithms from first principles.

Google HR: "Damn, we'll never get a good sysadmin if all these software development engineers keep applying..."

Re:Google interview, odd (1)

MrAnnoyanceToYou (654053) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517728)

Sounds to me like you didn't approach the question in the way they were looking for. My first question, when you are examining for a sysadmin job and you ask me a question about search algorithm efficiency is, "Sure, I can do this, but why would I struggle through it when I can ask someone who does it 10 hours a day every day to do it for me?" Remember, it's a company all about finding answers in the quickest way possible; asking the right question of the right source is the important part, not having the answer at your fingertips.

my top 10 places to work (1)

Treates2 (1004837) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517408)

my home, inside my cozy home.

Ha! I can top those... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517492)

My employer pays me to download porn and read Slashdot, whilst looking like I'm working. It doesn't get any better than that, people.

You faIl it... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517502)

in any w4y related

Missing Out on... (2, Insightful)

Beetle B. (516615) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517580)

Don't care what anyone else thinks. The best place to work is as a faculty at a university.

And if you complain about it not being a company, then you're just plain picky.

Re:Missing Out on... (1)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517692)

And if you complain about it not being a company, then you're just plain picky.

Well, arent they companies (non-profit corporations) even in the strict legal sense?

-b.

at number 44... (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517588)

Yahoo's on the list? Well, I guess it's a trade off - good working conditions and benefits along with an even money chance of being fired in the Yahoo shake-up in 2007.

Not my first choice of employer...

Small companies is where its at (4, Insightful)

jorghis (1000092) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517616)

Bear in mind that EA was also rated highly on this list for a while. This list is more about who can impress the editors with the best story about why their place is awesome to work at. What it really means is that Googles HR people are doing a great job of selling the company. Dont get me wrong, Google is a great place for a software engineer to work at, but this list doesnt mean diddly.

This list leaves most of the smaller companies off of it too. Maybe they should consider the title "100 best places to work if you want to work for a huge multinational." I am not knocking them for doing that, after all, how could they consider every small business in America? Just observing that there are some really great small companies out there. Also worth considering is that smaller companies will usually compensate you a lot better because they have fewer qualified applicants than the Googles and Microsofts of the world.

goolge? (2, Funny)

Vacardo (1048640) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517662)

Using goolge as a tag? I lol @ you

20% of how many hours per week? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517764)

> The chance to spend 20% of your time working on your own personal projects also sounds very appealing.

I've known a few people that have worked there and some that do now. From what I understand, at least most of the time, you get to spend 20% of the 50-70 hours of your work week there on your side project. Yeah, the official work week is only 40 hours, and you're technically supposed to be able to spend 8 hours of that on your own thing... but managers being managers (even at Google), they still schedule the work like you're spending all 40 hours a week (and maybe a little more) on your real project and are displeased if you don't deliver.

rub it in, why don't you? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517812)

This morning I received email from Google saying my resume wasn't an ideal match. I guess that means I stay at street level. Perhaps some scraps will fall from the gourmet table of the internet elite.

Good ol' supply and demand (4, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517844)

Do you notice something? Google is amongst the top places when it comes to benefits, and they're also one of the top players when it comes to productivity. Could it be that satisfied workers are productive workers? Even if they put 20% of their time into private projects?

Simply because a dissatisfied worker will put 20% of his time into the company and slack off the rest. Why bother working harder than necessary for the slave wage you get? Why bother spending half a thought on what you're doing? Do you get more money if you do something beneficial for your corp? Or will it be swallowed away by one of the managers as "their bright idea" anyway?

So Google is in the fortunate situation to hand pick their employees. The kind that is more productive in 20% of their time than a good deal of people in 150% (i.e. with 50 percent overtime). The kind of people that don't NEED a job, but the kind that can choose wherever they want to work.

So what's left for the rest? Exactly. The sludge. The kind of worker that tries to spend the hours between 9-5 with as little effort as possible and drops his keyboard the moment the clock strikes 5. Or, more likely, he'll drop his coffee mug.

That's what you get for minimum wage and zero benefits. Supply and demand, price and quality.

Google is productive because they're automated (4, Insightful)

Animats (122034) | more than 7 years ago | (#17517904)

Do you notice something? Google is amongst the top places when it comes to benefits, and they're also one of the top players when it comes to productivity. Could it be that satisfied workers are productive workers? Even if they put 20% of their time into private projects?

That's more the nature of the business. They don't make anything physical, and they provide very little customer service.

All of Google's businesses other than search generate little if any revenue. Really, stuff like Google's office systems exist to push back against Microsoft, not because running a word processor in the browser is a good idea.

I applied but was rejected in a day! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17517928)

I applied to the Google for a marketing position. I was rejected in less than 24 hours. I should have given them my blog site to read (they might have learned I was the perfect geek to help them toward solar system domination). Too bad, I guess I'll start a company and bury them. Remember the acronym for IBM, I'll Bury Microsoft! haha we'll all be using the google for many years to come.

I am the PWA of the 31337!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>