Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Buffer Layoffs

open.buffer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 429 posts

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#161

Post by SeoxyS »

jsprogrammer wrote: post #128
jpna66dd wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying it is customary to fly people business class in the Valley, rather than coach? Especially for a team retreat?

Are you saying you can fly coach from SF to Berlin and actually still engage in a "retreat"?

It's incredibly rare for startups to fly people around the world in business class. And I say this as someone who flies long-haul exclusively in Business and First—I still would never expect my employer to put me up in business. As a personal decision, it can make sense. I'll buy the fare outright when it's $3,000 or less for an international round-trip, and I make sure of credit card points and frequent flyer miles.

If I worked for a big public company, I'd expect them to put me up in business for anything longer than 6h. For a young small startup, I'd expect them to put me in a reasonably convenient economy ticket (e.g. not flying out of OAK instead of SFO, and not forcing me to take long connections, or really ultra-low-cost carriers like WOW Air).

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#162

Post by jpm_sd »

BenoitEssiambre wrote: post #146
k-mcgrady wrote: post #109

I'm curious as to why they had 94 employees. That seems like an insanely high number for a company that does something pretty basic (not dumping on the product, I like it and have used it in the past). What are all of those people doing?

As part of a company of less than 30 in a rural region, I get that feeling a lot. I'm sure I'm wrong but what do 57000 google employees do!? Am I really hitting an immense mechanical turk when I use google? Yet they can't spare a single person to spend a few weeks to convert the flash off of google finance?

Kind of, yes! You would not believe how much manual labor goes into maintaining and load balancing data centers and keeping deceptively simple-looking services up and running... There has been some recent press on the work done by legions of SREs that gets into a few of the details.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#163

Post by hammock »

jpna66dd wrote: post #88
hammock wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$4,000 would barely cover business-class airfare between SF Berlin for one employee. Not to mention accommodations, event space, meals and entertainment.

Are you saying it is customary to fly people business class in the Valley, rather than coach? Especially for a team retreat?

I cannot speak for Valley customs. But all of the (non-Valley) companies I'm familiar with extend business class to employees for international travel as a matter of policy.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#164

Post by dasil003 »

dave2000 wrote: post #114
compiler-guy wrote: post #36

This may be a little cynical but: "With our culture of bringing our whole selves to work and seeing team as family, with shared values we live by,..." In the American business world, you are an employee until you aren't. Confusing being an employee with being "family" is a mistake, both for the company and the employee. When times get bad, companies do what it takes to survive, including throwing employees overboard.…

"With our culture of bringing our whole selves to work and seeing team as family, with shared values we live by,..." It's moronic drivel, isn't it. Apart from being nonsensical (how can you bring less than your whole self to work, unless you've had some sort of psychotic breakdown) and the poor English ("seeing team as family") it just reads like corporate babble. It's not a family. I care about my family. I don't ca…

That's the way you see it, and to a certain extent I feel the same way. But two things:

Even with unabashed cynicism there's no denying that structuring a company like a cult has a huge advantage in terms of retention, dedication, salary requirements, etc. This dovetails perfectly with SV's youth worship because young people are more likely to buy into this crap, and they are also more likely to be willing to conflate their work and social circles.

Somewhat more charitably, not all companies are the same. Given the choice I would prefer to work for Apple than for Facebook because I think the former is generally doing better things for the world than the latter. On a more extreme level, I would definitely consider taking a lower salary from a company or non-profit I felt was doing really good things in the world. The point is, while "we are a family" is straight bullshit, the values of a company should matter. If I were to treat my employment as a purely mercenary transaction with no regards to anything but the transaction then I would be complicit in furthering the global corporate hegemony which unbridled capitalism is leading us toward.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#165

Post by dmitrygr »

"We made 10 layoffs in order to recover to a healthier financial position. Savings: $585,000"

so these people cost the company $58,500 apiece (this is incl. their benefits, insurance, etc). Meaning their salaries were, what? $40k?

wow?

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#166

Post by jea »

OliverJones wrote: post #136

> Leo and I are committing $100k each in the form of a loan at the lowest possible interest rate, with repayment only when Buffer reaches a healthy financial position. Savings: $200,000. Oops. This isn't savings. It's high-priority debt. Investors really want to invest in the future of the company, not the past. If these guys want to serve their company, they'll (a) write this off their personal books, considering it…

People who know about tax law apparently.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#167

Post by ryanmarsh »

Company lays off 10,000 people: "restructuring"

This guy lays off 10: heart felt apologies and deep moment of reflection

Criticize away HN, while he still has his humanity.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#168

Post by lazyjones »

danso wrote: post #7

FWIW, here's their public spreadsheet of salaries and calculations. Not sure if it's been recently updated (on closer look, seems to reflect the founders' stated pay cuts, and new hires as recent as last month): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l3bXAv8JE5RB9siMq36-... edit: Adding links to their blog posts: https://open.buffer.com/transparent-salaries/ https://open.buffer.com/introducing-open-salaries-at-buffe…

I wonder if those laid off were from the "chose higher salary over equity" crowd. It's certainly more attractive to do so and that's something people should consider when given that choice.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#169

Post by dasil003 »

asdfologist wrote: post #158
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how do you account for companies like ours when, during hard times the CEO and CTO took no pay for two months so that they could continue paying employees? Or by offering employees the same class of stock as the founders with the same voting rights etc...?

Would your CEO give up his life savings to pay your medical bills? Would he risk his life for you?

Would you do it for them? Come on, is taking no pay meaningless to you?

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#170

Post by arcticfox »

cyberpanther wrote: post #148
jc4p wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is so 100% on point. I think the Netflix NYT article from yesterday had a more realistic tone regarding the "family" aspect: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/magazine/can-netflix-survi... > The key concept is summed up in the 23rd slide. “We’re a team, not a family,” it reads. “Netflix leaders hire, develop and cut smartly, so we have stars in every position.” Your last sentence here is really important. If tha…

I agree the whole family thing is ridiculous. However, the performance focus of Netflix is probably too far on the other end and ridiculous too. People are not machines and performance will not always remain high. And also measurements of performance of people are often silly and useless. Performance will fluctuate and change with time. So a level a loyalty in the face of bad performance is still very advantageous ev…

The voting on your post implies people disagree, but the method you mention is the way the vast majority of companies try to operate because it intuitively makes sense.

Even in a cut-throat industry like sports, athletes aren't cut or traded the instant they enter a slump (if they still have future potential).

Post reply on HN