Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

  • Hacker News
  • The text of their "tweet that got me fired" is:

    > Introducing the Google Workspace CLI: https://github.com/googleworkspac e/cli - built for humans and agents.

    > Google Drive, Gmail, Calendar, and every Workspace API. 40+ agent skills included.

    Yeah, that absolutely looks like an official product announcement from Google. Surely it was obvious they'd get in trouble for that.

  • Is the issue primarily caused by the English language?

    (Google Workspace) CLI vs Google (Workspace CLI)

    Because Google has there name in the product for which the CLI was produced it looks like he's using the Google brand when he's only using a descriptor of what his CLI was for. Trademarks are funny, but if I build a thing that only works with Google Workspace wouldn't it be a bit weird to not say that?

  • The concerns seem to be primarily around trademark and logos? Unless there's more to it, those seem trivial to remedy by requiring removal of logos and renaming in the style of Clawdbot -> Moltbot -> OpenClaw. Google is well-known to be pretty sparing with firing people even for performance, so either this is a change in stance (entirely possible) or there's more to it.
  • I think that’s a good instinct but this line…

    “I think the cause was that Workspace and certain leaders (and projects) were afraid of being disrupted.”

    Suggests that there is much more to it. I suspect it’s actually about disregarding Google’s internal processes (which is forgivable) and then demanding to work unilaterally (unforgivable). The amount of positive feedback may have given the author too much confidence that he could dictate to leadership what comes next.

    A Google Workspace CLI is a useful project idea but it isn’t groundbreaking, it’s something that the Google Workspace team should be involved in. I suspect he just wanted go steamroll over them. Shipping stuff in a team is never about just producing the code.

  • For over the last >1 year, Google has been dismissing people without warning or cause. The days where it was nearly impossible to be fired are over; now you might be severed by surprise for no given reason at all.
  • Justin’s blog is the consistently the best resource for Google Apps Script content and he genuinely seemed to connect with the platform. He always stood out, as Googlers don’t typically seem to connect with anyone/anything.
  • 5 years ago out of necessity I made a CLI around a private product API to manage something it wasn't making publicly, by reverse-engineering the API and complex logons and etc. It was very useful to ~ 100 people worldwide but it was enough of an audience. But I couldn't get any traction releasing it publicly until a distinguished engineer very far away from my org was in need of just this tool for his project. All of a sudden I got an innovation award from company leadership and legal fast tracked open-sourcing it. Pushing something like this out into public repo without legal review is suicidal.
  • I am not going to share much more than what I already have, but I think this speaks to the experience of working in big tech and the disruption caused by AI both at the level of teams/roadmaps/incentives and changing user behavior.
  • I haven't been following along with your story closely so forgive me for asking you to repeat things that you've probably already said, but did they just fire you out of the blue or did they talk to you and it didn't go well?
  • Sorry to hear your story.

    Since I’ve never work at FAANG, does Google have strict procedures (and approvals) before launching a product? And if so, did this go through that process?

  • Really sorry to hear about this. It's so ironic because your tool is something that made G workspace so much more useful to me personally and was a deciding factor in which calendar project I used. Getting fired for making a product more useful to customers is quite ironic.

    Thank you for your work on the tool! Paired with a claude skill I wrote around it, it saves me a ton of time creating a logseq meeting note page for important meetings.

    I wish you the best of luck landing somewhere that appreciates you a lot more than G did.

  • It would help if you clarify whether you followed the OSS release process guidelines, which are very clearly documented.

    "Fired for making a thing" is different from "fired for not following the rules".

  • Yikes. I see Justin posted this, and I'm sure he can't say much - but this is an absolutely insane story.

    Google has gone from encouraging 20% time (to create amazing projects like this) to firing people for doing it.

    There seems to be some true maliciousness going on at Google. You have this, you have the open source Gemini CLI getting replaced with a shittier closed source Antigravity CLI, etc... etc... What is going on there?

  • Maybe the policy is that you can’t just release 20% time projects publically?
  • its what happens when a company runs out of ideas and is mostly run by people with MBAs.

    Good ideas are now risky because it steps on the toes of someone's fiefdom

  • When has 20% projects ever been about bypassing every launch process and just posting your product publicly?

    Google may be a big bureaucracy now, but launch approvals and processes are there for a reason.

  • It sounds like a big part of why he was let go is that he created a work-related product, possibly using his '20% time' meaning he created it while at work, and then released it with Google branding and logos, all of which without clearing it with anyone at the company, while his name is attached to the company.

    In other words, he created an extremely official-looking product and released it in a way that made it look extremely official and blindsided everyone when suddenly there's a viral Google Workspace tool released by a Googler with Google branding that wasn't released by Google.

    I'm not saying he should have been fired, necessarily, but he demonstrated _extremely_ poor judgement in doing this the way he did and put his manager and everyone else in an extremely awkward and uncomfortable position.

  • I never worked for Google, but I do have fairly extensive experience with these kinds of situations. From that perspective, I assume there has to be more to the story for it to lead to a firing.

    In general, when a talented employee (like OP) does something like this, the response is usually something like:

    “We appreciate and love your initiative, and we want to encourage you to keep doing this kind of work. However, this needs to be taken down, and you need to make sure this does not happen again.”

    Usually, these things are not career-ending moves. Actually it might be even opposite. Sure one might get labeled as a “cowboy”, but there is always some executive who will support “cowboys” because they shake things up. So one can actually get a promotion.

    So I think there is something more here.

    Either Google handled this very badly (and organization is broken) or the OP did not act in the company’s best interest and intentionally refused to follow certain instructions.

  • My guess is he didn't say "ok sorry I'll double check in future" but got into an argument with them about how he was right.
  • > However, this needs to be taken down, and you need to make sure this does not happen again.

    It's still up now, so it seems like they do not actually think it needs to be taken down

  • Given their manager was the one who announced their project I'm leaning closer to Google handling this badly? Which is understandable in an organisation so large tbh. Sometimes things are done badly, no one is perfect, especially not large organisations.
  • Looks like a textbook example of Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy.[a]

    People like the OP, Justin Poehnelt, who build cool things out of self-motivation that others find interesting and want to use, are now at the mercy of those inside Google who care more about the company's internal bureaucracy and their own role and importance within it. To them, the fact that the OP's project was an instant github hit meant nothing.

    --

    EDIT: Others here are saying that Justin released his code with Google's branding without asking for approval. If that's true, it wasn't right of him, and his firing was justifiable. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48650310 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48650192

    ---

    [a] https://jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html

  • Google is worth $4+ TRILLION. There is natural and needed bureaucracy in preserving that. This type of probably well-meaning, but cowboy activity is not worth the risk to Google.
    by xnx
  • i think your edit is asinine. google could have requested the removal of the trademark and made everything kosher, but they didn't. They decided to make an example of a guy who built something useful that people liked and now every other engineer at google will think twice before adding any not previously approved value to the business.

    You were right above the edit.

  • People ask why Google's Gemini is falling behind the competition in spite of Google's immense resources, this kind of thing is an example why.
  • Actually it means less than nothing, it's a negative, because it shows that working outside the system can be popular and potentially woo away users, which challenges the supremacy of the organization.
  • I think your first take still stands.
  • EDIT #2: Former Googlers here say that for a long time it was common at Google to let employees publish code with Google branding on github, in which case the firing was not justifiable. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48652851 Yes, I changed my mind again. I have no qualms about changing my mind if the facts justify it :-)
  • Interesting that people here seem so sympathetic to the fired guy. Wouldn’t you kind of expect to be fired if you release a project under your employers name that’s not even associated with them and hasn’t been cleared? Working for them actually makes it worse because people could look up your name and would see that you actually work for google. It’s kind of obvious that this is a bad idea, right?
  • Yeah I'm struggling to believe that this person who worked at Google for 7 years was surprised by this outcome. Google has very clear processes for contributing to open source as an employee. I'm skeptical that this person never navigate to go/opensource (not remembering exactly the link, but it might literally be that) and read the policies there in that amount of time...

    This is not even an endorsement of those policies or of this action in enforcing them. I'm just saying it's very well documented there what you can and can't do and how to do things the "right" way. Lots of people understandable chafe at those rules, but the consequences of just saying yolo and ignoring them are fairly predictable...