SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce • Hacker News Board

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#121

Post by toomuchtodo » Sat, Jan 12, 2019, 2:22 AM UTC

whatshisface wrote: post #112

genericone wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were the sacrificial lambs at least told in secret that they were 'hired in order to be laid off' at the next round? I hope they were not just given rote tasks, but allowed to explore their skills while they are in limbo so that they can train-up or look for jobs... Nah that's just wishful thinking.

Telling someone they're going to be laid off and having them build skills both reduce their "goal performance," thereby serving the purpose of justifiably lowering their stack rank. I can imagine hiring some smart guy with a good resume, then telling him congratulations he just won a year's supply of O'Riley books.

"I don't even have to come into the office, I can do this job from home."

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#122

Post by wonderwonder » Sat, Jan 12, 2019, 2:24 AM UTC

viraptor wrote: post #110

m0zg wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. What would be more cruel is to keep people guessing for weeks, or to do several smaller layoffs. That's how it's usually done, and it utterly decimates the morale, and causes the best people to leave. The best way to do a layoff is to cut once, cut deep, and do it quickly. And of course to not be an asshole and offer severance compensation to folks who were laid off.

You can still tell everyone immediately at the end of the day. Or just send the email on the weekend. You don't have to say you're going to do it first and keep everyone worried.

There is no great way to do it. If they told people in person, people would frame it as being humiliated and then forced to walk through the office with everyone knowing. If they did not warn people, they would complain about being blind sided. Layoffs are a terrible thing to go through and all things considered I don't think this was a bad way at all. No one had to do the walk of shame, everyone had a day or so to prepare themselves for it.

But that is just my preference, others would prefer something else. Everyone though would prefer not to get laid off. Unfortunate for all involved.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#123

Post by foxhop » Sat, Jan 12, 2019, 2:25 AM UTC

jpatokal wrote: post #40

sombremesa wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention that eventually you end up firing some really smart people and find worse replacements (not in the least due to shitty reputation - but also because of regression to the mean and because people are biased towards hiring worse than themselves in this regime). Definitely so at 10% p.a. if you're in a remotely niche industry.

Apparently some managers used to hire sacrificial lambs with the express purpose of culling them to spare the rest of the team.

I think this happened to me at one point.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#124

Post by cyberferret » Sat, Jan 12, 2019, 2:26 AM UTC

bredren wrote: post #82

cyberferret wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, if you cannot see that "fire by email" is far more impersonal and disconnecting than compassionately meeting with the employee 1 on 1 and giving them a definitive exit path along with the financial support to do so, then please do not ever work in HR or be responsible for employing people in the future. To subject ALL your employees to the 50/50 prospect that they will have a job come next working day is t…

Why? People are hired by email all of the time. Full time positions are more transactional now than ever before. There is no real loyalty either way.

You skipped right over the hiring facts of: the face to face interviews, consideration, and most importantly, the option for the (potential) employee to exercise their choice of whether to take the job or not.

None of which is available to the employee in a 'fire by email' scenario.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#125

Post by WheelsAtLarge » Sat, Jan 12, 2019, 2:27 AM UTC

slededit wrote: post #74

WheelsAtLarge wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at where GE is now. Yes, Welch is gone now but the effects of his leadership are there.

Are we just going to completely ignore the 17 year reign of Jeff Immelt? GE Capital gained enough prominence to destroy the company under his reign. Jeff was the one that acquired one of the nations largest subprime lenders in 2004, primed perfectly to maximize losses in 2008.

You're reinforcing my point Immelt was hand selected by Welch as his replacement. Additionally, Welch made GE's transition to financial services.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#126

Post by wonderwonder » Sat, Jan 12, 2019, 2:28 AM UTC

cyberferret wrote: post #57

mulmen wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's less cruel? Face to face meetings? Layoffs suck, how is this particularly egregious?

Seriously, if you cannot see that "fire by email" is far more impersonal and disconnecting than compassionately meeting with the employee 1 on 1 and giving them a definitive exit path along with the financial support to do so, then please do not ever work in HR or be responsible for employing people in the future. To subject ALL your employees to the 50/50 prospect that they will have a job come next working day is t…

It all depends on the person, personally I would prefer the spacex method as I don't have to put on a brave face for someone who is firing me. I also don't have to walk through the office knowing everyone is feeling sorry for me. The warning also gives me a day or so to brace myself in private at my home for the email so I am not caught completely off guard.

Also they fired 10% so there was a 9/10 chance they would be keeping there jobs.

No matter the method its done, everyone emerges from a layoff knowing that they are just a line item on a spreadsheet. Its unfortunate but true.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#127

Post by omeid2 » Sat, Jan 12, 2019, 2:29 AM UTC

WheelsAtLarge wrote: post #52

viraptor wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever the reasons for the workforce reduction, this way of doing it is just unnecessarily cruel.

From what I've read about Musk, doing it this way is part of his management style. People's feelings come second to getting things done efficiently. Well, efficiently as he sees it.

There is nothing efficient about ruining people's weekend while they are being fired. This could have been done by sending out the emails at the end of Friday without making people nervous and worried over weekend.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#128

Post by swampthinker » Sat, Jan 12, 2019, 2:31 AM UTC

kepano wrote: post #30

If you are affected by the layoffs in Los Angeles, working in software engineering (esp. on ERP and internal tools), UI/UX, or supply chain — my company, Lumi is hiring https://www.lumi.com/jobs

Do you guys have any plans for magnetic closure boxes by chance?

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#129

Post by tuesdayrain » Sat, Jan 12, 2019, 2:32 AM UTC

cyberferret wrote: post #57

mulmen wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's less cruel? Face to face meetings? Layoffs suck, how is this particularly egregious?

Seriously, if you cannot see that "fire by email" is far more impersonal and disconnecting than compassionately meeting with the employee 1 on 1 and giving them a definitive exit path along with the financial support to do so, then please do not ever work in HR or be responsible for employing people in the future. To subject ALL your employees to the 50/50 prospect that they will have a job come next working day is t…

As someone who has been laid off, I would have much preferred an email over the awkward 1 on 1 meeting I got with my boss instead. I've been looking at other jobs already and just wanted to move on with my life. Instead I got stuck in a long conversation which was basically him just showering me with pity that I didn't want but had to graciously accept.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#130

Post by dilyevsky » Sat, Jan 12, 2019, 2:32 AM UTC

mulmen wrote: post #51

viraptor wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever the reasons for the workforce reduction, this way of doing it is just unnecessarily cruel.

What's less cruel? Face to face meetings? Layoffs suck, how is this particularly egregious?

Yes face to face with the person who made the decision (presumably your direct or skip manager) not the random hr person is “less cruel” (really it’s about integrity).