> Google is just really bad at this, but seems to think it's not bad at this
The BigTech firms have been doing this intentionally for a very long time. I started hearing about Microsoft doing the security-escorts-you-straight-out-the-door all the way back in 2012.
It's not that they are bad at this, it's that they think the trade-off works out in their favour. And it probably does - what's a few but-hurt former employees, versus one disgruntled former employee who had enough warning to snag critical data on their way out the door?
Though it's probably our fault, since we're all so trusting of our mega corp employers, and/or so optimistic about our chances of surviving layoffs, that no one is stashing the incriminating data ahead of time.
> "I started hearing about Microsoft doing the security-escorts-you-straight-out-the-door all the way back in 2012."
Are you sure about that? Microsoft's 2014 layoffs, which were large enough to be reported in the tech press, let employees keep network and building access until the actual layoff date.
Can confirm as well, was laid off from Microsoft in 2023, and I kept access for about a week and a half (and then was paid for an additional 60 days after that, but no longer had access to anything, this was just the WARN period).
Same thing for people just leaving. I left in 2024, and my login and everything around it kept working until my announced leave date (and I gave more than a month notice).
I do recall stories of people getting escorted out, but this was from 00s.