A Google engineer named Justin Poehnelt made waves last week with a tweet suggesting the situation in Mountain View should be embarrassing. Two months prior, he claims he was let go by Google. His creation, a command line tool for Google Workspace, quickly gained popularity — ranking as the top project on Hacker News, earning over 25,000 stars on GitHub in just days. Interestingly, just two days before his termination, Google revealed plans for an official Workspace CLI at its Cloud Next conference.
It seems counterintuitive: the very tool that developers craved became the reason for his dismissal, only for Google to release a similar version afterward. This incident perfectly encapsulates a broader issue—why a company once synonymous with innovation is now perceived as sluggish.
For those unfamiliar with tech jargon, CLI stands for command line interface, which allows users to interact with software through text commands rather than graphical images. Poehnelt’s tool, named gws, enables access to Google services like Gmail, Drive, and Calendar through the terminal. Even more impressive was the AI component he developed, which came equipped with over 40 “skills” to function autonomously.
Such companies often enjoy prolonged success, but their innovation can stall. What’s clever about Poehnelt’s tool is that it doesn’t rely on a static set of commands. It dynamically reads the Google API directory in real time, adapting as new features are added.
The narrative that has emerged brands Poehnelt as a “rogue employee,” but this was not a side project. He dedicated nearly seven years to Google’s Workspace Developer Relations team, working on open-source tools aligned with the company’s APIs. He was fulfilling his job responsibilities — surpassing expectations, in fact.
So, why was he let go? Officially, it boils down to branding. His tool existed under Google’s GitHub account, complete with the company’s logo, which made it appear official when it wasn’t sanctioned. Legal concerns were raised about who allowed this to happen.
While this concern is valid — companies can’t permit unauthorized use of their branding due to liability risks — there are straightforward solutions that don’t involve termination. A simple logo change or a disclaimer could have sufficed. Companies make such adjustments routinely without careers hanging in the balance.
Poehnelt’s own view provides a more candid insight. He suspects the core issue was a fear that his tool might disturb various leaders and projects associated with Workspace. It wasn’t just about the CLI; it was a broader anxiety about the implications of AI agents within Google Workspace.
Essentially, his tool worked too effectively, showcasing the future of AI in the Workspace and garnering considerable attention. Certain product managers, whose plans suddenly seemed outdated, may not have appreciated the unintended spotlight. His termination wasn’t due to a rule violation; rather, it was due to being ahead of the curve.
There’s a certain irony in this. Google’s origins trace back to two graduate students who improvised on university resources without permission. The ethos of Silicon Valley is built on innovation from unconventional beginnings. Now, the same company that once embraced this spirit has turned into a bureaucracy, stifling those who follow the same philosophy.
This isn’t an isolated incident either. Adi Osmani, a reputable web developer with 14 years at Google, also departed around the same time, stating that his tweet about a similar tool led to his dismissal. Another figure in the community summarized the situation—Poehnelt was let go for creating a tool that Google later sought to replicate.
Those capable of steering Google’s future are increasingly choosing to forge their own paths, tapping into their creativity without the corporate restrictions. Poehnelt has already moved on, continuing his work independently while the official Google version remains in the pipeline.
Large corporations can maintain momentum for years, but decay sets in much faster. It often occurs when a company begins to see its creators as threats instead of assets. You can’t restore a valuable employee’s trust after implying that enthusiasm leads to termination.
It’s essential for Google to remember its roots and how it once encouraged innovation, before it’s truly too late.
