When Google co-founder Sergey Brin stepped away from daily executive duties in 2019, many assumed his name would slowly fade from headlines. But all that changed after a controversial call for 60-hour work weeks.
In an internal document addressed to engineers and researchers working on Google's AI projects, especially the Gemini group, Brin urged the team to commit to 60-hour workweeks and full-time office attendance. He sees this as the perfect amount of hustle to propel Google toward its ultimate goal of developing advanced AI before the competition.
While some employees are motivated by the prospect of building next-generation technology, others worry that demands for extended hours and mandatory on-site presence may be out of touch with the reality of modern life.
The news quickly spread nationwide, with comments highlighting the disconnect between big bosses obsessed with winning the AI arms race and its workers. Many online suggested Brin was out of touch by asking employees to work long hours on something that would replace them. At the same time, others indicated that hiring 50% more workers for the extra 20 hours would make more sense.
undefinedSergey Brin says Google could reach AGI if employees worked harder and were in the office more, saying '60 hours a week is the sweet spot of productivity'.undefined
undefined Paul Thurrott (@thurrott) February 28, 2025
Employee: I see. What do we get for killing ourselves in that fashion?
Brin: We'll fire you because AI can do your job.
It is not the first time a prominent figure in tech has pushed for more face time in the office, and it probably will not be the last. But, the tone of Brin's memo has cast fresh light on the broader challenges that Google and other tech players face in the race to develop AI models capable of transforming entire industries or risk becoming the next AOL or Yahoo.
The race to AGI just got real
The impetus behind Brin's memo is the increasingly tight race to develop artificial general intelligence or AGI. Though definitions of AGI vary, it is broadly considered to be AI on par with or surpassing human intelligence.
The entire sector has accelerated dramatically since OpenAI's launch of ChatGPT in late 2022. Competitors like Microsoft, Meta, and many startups are jostling for the top spot. According to Brin, this urgency calls for what he considers a "turbocharged" effort within Google.
"Competition has accelerated immensely, and the final race to AGI is afoot," Brin wrote, as cited by multiple press accounts. He said that while Google has "all the ingredients" to maintain its edge, its employees must supercharge their efforts.
The new directive seems clear for the Gemini team, a set of cutting-edge AI models at the center of Google's strategy. They expect to spend more time at their desks and less time working remotely.
There are also increasing concerns about what AGI would mean for the world. After retiring its motto, "Don't be evil," Google appears to be on a darker path after announcing changes to its AI policy, ending its ban on AI weapons.
Google 2000: “Don’t be evil”
undefined Max Tegmark (@tegmark) February 6, 2025
Google 2018: “At least don’t apply AI in ways likely to cause overall harm”
Google 2025: “F*ck it!” pic.twitter.com/5HA46F3XQu
Brin's latest comments suggest a distinct pivot. The best path forward is a renewed sense of urgency and a willingness to put in extra hours. Yet he also noted that "anything beyond" 60 hours could do more harm than good.
A show of strength or a step too far?
Critics of the new plan say that 60-hour weeks continued over long stretches risk alienating workers who might otherwise be invested in Google's AI ambitions. The tech world is littered with cautionary tales of teams burning out amid near-constant deadlines and the never-ending quest for the next big breakthrough.
Historically, heavy workloads in Silicon Valley have been typical, but they usually go hand in hand with the promise of lucrative stock options or the romanticism of launching a startup. In Google's case, the company is far past its startup days, and it remains to be seen whether employees who joined expecting a balanced environment are willing to adapt.
At the same time, some employees on AI teams may see Brin's memo as a natural extension of existing company culture. After all, the founders, Brin and Larry Page, were known for their intense curiosity and bold bets. According to staffers who have spoken anonymously, the idea that a big sprint might be required to hit the next milestone is unsurprising.
With AI as the most significant technological leap of the decade, many engineers have already put in long hours to achieve substantial leaps in model training and deployment.
When a founder speaks, does it become an unspoken rule?
From a human resources viewpoint, imposing what some interpret as an unspoken rule to clock 60 hours weekly could introduce equity and morale issues. Employees juggling caregiving responsibilities or facing long commutes may struggle to meet such demands, primarily if those demands are informally enforced.
While Brin's memo does not appear to be a formal mandate, and Google's official return-to-office policy remains three days per week when a company founder suggests something, it often carries extra weight. Ignoring that suggestion might be perceived as falling short of the standard, regardless of official policy.
Sergey Brin's reference to a 60-hour workweek as a "sweet spot" for productivity is a stark contrast to research on employee well-being and output. Studies stretching back decades suggest that productivity often peaks around 40 to 50 hours per week, tapering off sharply beyond that.
60-hour work weeks being normalized...
undefined TechLead (@techleadhd) March 1, 2025
Sergey Brin to Googlers: undefinedIn my experience about 60 hours a week is the sweet spot of productivity. Some folks put in a lot more but can burn out or lose creativity. A number of folks work less than 60 hours and a small number put in the… pic.twitter.com/qIO4oqnY4f
Brin's memo addresses this concern by warning that exceeding the 60-hour threshold could be detrimental. It is an acknowledgment that knowledge workers can only do so much before their creativity flags and their mental health suffers.
The real question is whether employees will view 60 hours as a suggestion or a requirement and how strictly managers might enforce such a number. Will internal performance reviews start to reflect this new standard? Or are Brin's words more of a rallying cry than a literal directive?
Leverage your tools
Another intriguing point in Brin's memo is his push for employees to leverage Google's own AI. He argued that by using in-house AI tools, the company's engineering teams can become "the most efficient coders and AI scientists in the world."
It is a stance that aligns with the broader strategy among tech firms to "dogfood" their products, relying on them internally to refine features, fix bugs, and prove real-world utility.
If employees genuinely see direct benefits from integrating Google's AI into their daily workflows, they might meet that 60-hour target more quickly since the tools could help reduce time spent on repetitive tasks.
Brin's push for more in-office time and extended workweeks highlights the tension when a company stakes its future on a world-changing technology. Brin's all-hands-on-deck mentality can yield extraordinary breakthroughs reminiscent of the moonshot projects Google once championed. But, there is a very real cost to employees' personal lives and ability to sustain peak performance.
As tensions rise and the AI arms race gathers pace, many are trying to predict who the next generation of big tech will replace the likes of Google, Amazon, Meta, and co. The future is uncertain, and the only guarantee is that the path to AI supremacy will be shaped as much by how companies treat their people and how well they train their models.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are markedmarked