During Covid, there was an increased demand for certain online services. As a result, companies hired additional permanent staff members to meet the extra demand. Instead, they could have chosen to hire these people on temporary contracts. Hiring staff on a temporary contract would have been more transparent.
In the end, this is a business decision, and it is fair enough. However, claiming responsibility while knowing full well they would make the exact same decision again in the future is a different matter.
I think your view is very simplistic and reductionist on how tech companies work. They are not not factories, they did not over hire to get boots on ground for support. They were hiring and creating brand new things with glee as stock and revenue soared.
Tech companies are "factories" of software products and features. During COVID, there was an increased demand for such products, justifying additional investments in new products or features to remain competitive. This required a wide variety of staff members.
Presumably at least some of them left a job to join Google. They now have no job, but might still have one had they not moved. It may very well be a tiny proportion of the total, of course.
What does this even mean? Are you implying these people would have been better off not being hired?