I have to admit, I'm pretty heavily tied into the Google brands. My blog is on the Google-run Blogger, I read all my feeds in Google Reader, and my primary email is Gmail. There's also Gtalk, the Google search engine, and Picassa, all of which I use almost exclusively. So the article "On Day Care, Google Makes a Rare Fumble" from Saturday's New York Times, which I found through Heather's shared feeds in Google Reader, really saddens me.
Here's an excerpt (bolded parts by me, for those of us who skim). I'd love to know what you think:
Two months ago, Google held a series of secret focus groups with employees who have children in Google’s day care facilities. The purpose was to gauge their reaction to the company’s plan to raise the amount it charged for in-house day care by 75 percent.
Parents who had been paying $1,425 a month for infant care would see their costs rise to nearly $2,500 — well above the market rate. For parents with toddlers and preschoolers, who were charged less, the price increases were equally eye-popping. Under the new plan, parents with two kids in Google day care would most likely see their annual day care bill grow to more than $57,000 from around $33,000.
At the first of the three focus groups, parents wept openly. As word leaked out about the company’s plan, the Google parents began to fight back. They came up with ideas to save money, used the company’s T.G.I.F. sessions — a weekly meeting for anyone who wanted to ask questions of Google’s top executives — to plead their case, and conducted surveys showing that most parents with children in Google day care would have to leave Google’s facilities and find less expensive child care.
Do you think you know how this story ends? You’re probably guessing that because it involves “do no evil” Google, Fortune magazine’s “Best Company to Work For” the past two years, this is a heart-warming tale of a good company reversing a dumb decision.
If only. Although Google is rolling back its price increase slightly and is phasing in the higher price over five quarters, the outline of the original decision remains largely unchanged. At a T.G.I.F. in June, the Google co-founder Sergey Brin said he had no sympathy for the parents, and that he was tired of “Googlers” who felt entitled to perks like “bottled water and M&Ms,” according to several people in the meeting.
Of course, those of us with kids know that on-site daycare is not equivalent to bottled water and M&Ms. It can be the reason you take or leave a job, and those of us who work on Teh Internets are able to be highly mobile. Anyway, the article goes on to describe the daycare, which does indeed sound amazing in a bloated, over-done way. But who doesn't want the very best for their kids?
But here’s the real problem: providing day care isn’t an economics experiment, nor should it be just another Google perk, alongside organic food and free M&Ms. Day care matters to people’s lives in a way that few other perks do. There are many people in this country — including, I’ll bet, many Googlers — who believe that employer-provided day care, at affordable prices, ought to be like health insurance, a benefit that every company provides as a matter of course. Yet as the technology blog Valleywag noted recently, Google doesn’t even advertise day care as a benefit for its employees anymore. That’s the real shame.
Google may be providing the greatest day care ever, but so what? It doesn’t matter how good the day care is if only its wealthiest employees can afford to use it. If Google had really wanted to do something path-breaking about its day care crisis, it would have spent less time creating elitist day care centers and more time figuring out how to “scale” day care for everybody no matter what their salaries.
Instead, Google has shown that it thinks about day care the same way every other company does — as a luxury, not a benefit. Judging by what’s transpired, that’s what Google is fast becoming: just another company.






22 comments:
$57K? OMG. It's daycare, not Harvard.
Never mind it's wrong. It doesn't work in the economy. It's basic supply & demand. I won't be shocked when a national chain daycare opens up down the road from google HQ providing competitive rates and is nearly on-campus.
Sergey is young and has only been married for a year. He has no concept what it's like to work children into your lives. Or maneuver your life with children. He should have zipped it. I wonder if legal is telling him to zip it now?
when i googled [google just another company] i saw an interesting gender split on opinion... just sayin'...
Every single company or non-profit I have worked for who exploited the "caring, progressive" work environment angle, pulled shit like this eventually.
Of course it is admirable that they even have on site care---although I am disgusted I find that admirable and not just a cost of doing business.
Day care is such an issue for parents. Here in Boston it is absurdly expensive--those proposed Google rates sound familiar. I both want and need to return to WOH this fall, and I have no idea how I am going to secure aftercare, and then how I'll manage to pay for it. If a potential employer offered even reasonable quality care at a semi-affordable price, I'd sign on.
And that's sad really, when the bar is set so low.
Forgot to add that I find it disgusting how Google basically has these parents by the balls. The ones who do leave and find other arrangements are probably better off long-term than those who absorb the increase.
I bet a lot of those who are angry will stay at Google even if they send their kids elsewhere, since he economy is rough and many of them likely got used to a certain lifestyle.
Google knew they had a semi-captive market for their onsite care, and obviously could give a fuck about how it effects their employees.
A-holes. Sigh, so sad. It just reinforces that whole conundrum yet again: why I can not AFFORD to work.
Thanks for highlighting this. Such a shame!! Especially the attitude being presented by that executive.
It all makes me want to move to Sweden
Karrie sent me here.
I read this yesterday and I was appalled. I stayed home with my kid and work as a freelancer for just this very reason. Companies, even ones with this "progressive" rep, eventually screw you if you choose to be a parent. What does that say about our society? That I can have more income if I live hand-to-mouth as a freelancer than if I work full-time at a corporation and pay for daycare?
I'm with your other commenter - Sweden, here I come.
There is a big piece of information missing here -- what are these employees' salaries? If we are talking about a privileged group making in the six figures or more, then I am sorry, my heart does not bleed for them. Google isn't just offering day care, they are offering premium day care. Just how much of the cost should they subsidize? And would the parents have preferred Google reduce the quality instead?
can some say highway robery???
Karrie, that's the most egregious part of it, the fact that most of the parents are screwed. So the on-site daycare is only going to work for the highest paid workers.
K, Google's pay structure is approximately the same as it is at comparable companies. You can find out more on TechCrunch. They report a range from $43K to $160K. So, keeping two kids in daycare would be difficult even for the six-figure workers.
I don't think the issue is Google's unwillingness to continue to subsidize the daycare. It's that the original idea -- daycare on-site for workers -- was inflated to a "premium" daycare that probably looked great to investors and prospective employees. Then, when it became evident that it wasn't financial viable, instead of scaling back to be something that would work, the co-founder (who makes WAY more than the average employee) was vaguely hostile.
The reason so many parents are ticked off about this is that Google's dismissiveness is what a lot of us face in our own jobs.
Heather, I just had a thought about why it seems that women are more upset about this than men. On-site daycare facilitates nursing, lets parents work longer hours and be more competitive, and helps parents achieve some semblance of a work-life balance. In general, these are not issues faced by someone who has a partner who will agree to put their career on hold (or, in the tech world, give up their career outright); these are mothers' issues.
Where Google went wrong was to let one employee (the woman who owned the garage the company was started in) to turn their day care operation into a very expensive pet project. The wait list was 70 long -- thus the shot of a relatively new employee getting her infant into the on-site center was about nil.
All while Google was subsidizing its daycare to the tune of 37k a kid a year. As someone who owns Google stock I am gobsmacked over that amount!
They sure took the eye off the prize -- affordable, on-site, quality care -- in exchange for an elaborate and unnecessary extravagance that very few of its own workers can now afford.
And that should be 700 not 7!
K, I could not agree with you more, man.
I was a public school teacher and several years before I became a mom the county began phasing out the few 'in house' facilities on campus. Even though most faculty chose not to use them (students are in there as 'aids' which I think turned some people off) a few of my colleagues (typically those that were breastfeeding) loved having their babies on campus. They would pick them up during their plan periods, eat lunch with them and then after school if they were working in their rooms, etc. I probably would not have left teaching if this were an option and why shouldn't it be?? The main reason teachers leave the profession when their children are young is the salary adjustment after paying for childcare just doesn't make sense.
Super shame on Google but I think it is to be expected. I remember when Microsoft was the bomb to work for but eventually they started hiring more and more 'contract' employees to avoid benefits, etc. 'Corporatia' is an ugly beast.
I think that increase is crazy! Statistics prove that inhouse day care produces better employee productivity and company loyalty. Okay...I'm sure that there is a better way to say that but you get the point. That is just crazy!
They might be able to change some of the perks for kids like free M&M's...but why would they push the people who helped them become great to leave and find new day care.
In my job there is not such thing as inhouse day care...but I know that people would appreicate the concept. But maybe not at $57K!
All this does make me want to withdraw all the support I have for Google, but I'm with you, Kelly; I use Gmail, Blogger, Reader, maps and the search engine several times daily.
It makes me feel sick to imagine what those parents are going through. My daycare is subsidized, and if it weren't, I'd most likely have to quit my job and freelance part-time, and maybe access a sitting co-op (which doesn't sound so bad some days).
I hope Catherine's right and another enterprising daycare company supplies their demand. And quickly.
that quote proves Sergey Brin is the new Bill Gates. he can't hide anymore.
ugh. there is so much to say here.it sounds a bit like old tech company speak. i still remember the days when i was screwed at another major tech company simply because i was a parent.
it all seems to me that when people who are not parents start running companies, their priorities are quite different. they prefer spending money on ever-flowing espresso makers instead of benefits that actually make a difference in working parents' lives.
this all reminds me of that whole feministing rant we had a few months ago... people who haven't walked a mile in someone else's shoes has no earthly idea what reality is like, KWIM?
Thanks for highlighting this article. Google is so hypocritical - they trumpet a "do no evil" mantra, but they are a business like every other. Keep in mind that they are also trying to corner the market on online information, and put newspapers out of business. And they are digitizing the holdings of major college libraries. Do you think they will dole out all of this info for free forever? Guess again. And oh yeah, they pry into your documents and emails for "marketing" purposes. (Disclaimer: I work for a public library and am maybe just a little sick and tired of hearing how we libraries are obsolete b/c of google. Just remember - public libraries are an instrument of democracy - we provide access to ALL for FREE- thanks to residents' generous tax dollars. Google is a corporation, out to MAKE $$$.)
Google wants young, geeky, single software engineers. So what is the point in taking care of the parents?
I'm not convinced it's a good business decision to only hire people in their 20s and then ensure the won't stay long-term.
Post a Comment