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

SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 557 posts

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#371

Post by wongarsu »

cyberferret wrote: post #187
catmanjan wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that logic no company with less than 11 people should ever fire anyone...

Firing one person in a 10 person company could mean that you lose your entire accounting/finance skillset in one fell swoop. Or your sole developer. It is a big deal in terms of intellectual property and skill pool within your organisation. Down stream impact of how to cope with that loss is another factor. Fire your book keeper and does your remaining engineering team have to spend 10% of their time doing invoices a…

It could also mean firing that one developer who vastly underperforms, but you still have 5 other skilled developers because developing happens to be what your company does.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#372

Post by pbhjpbhj »

fma wrote: post #254
sonnyblarney wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10% is huge by any measure.

I work for GM (for now). 15% layoffs were announced before Christmas... No one knows when the ax will drop. Rumor is Monday or Tuesday. Moral is low and the office has been pretty damn quiet. Meanwhile we just raises earnings forecast today...

Which is kinda just how capitalism "works".

In certain circumstances, once the means of production are created [most of] the workers are no longer needed, but the means being privately held (by a narrow group of owners) means they alone can benefit going forward.

You can make a feast together and share it; or you can make a feast together, kick out most of the helpers and gorge yourself.

Capitalism says the second option is better because you get to have more.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#373

Post by Rainymood »

antpls wrote: post #265

I don't understand how anyone in the world accept such social contract of being laid off anytime for arbitrary reasons. If you create a company, you take care of it and all of its members. If you have to cut expenses because the company needs to be "leaner" then you cut the salaries starting from the top executives. Eventually you fire management, because the state of the company is in part the result of their decisi…

>laid off anytime for arbitrary reasons.

You can also leave for any arbitrary reason, anything else is slavery, simply put. This goes both ways.

>If you create a company, you take care of it and all of its members.

If you create a company, you have a fiduciary duty towards your shareholders. A company only exist when it is profitable (either now or in the future) and it can only continue to exist if it can do so profitably. Companies don't exist to "take care of its members", those are what unions are for ... oh ... wait ...

>Will the 10% of the employees be the ones who are already in the less comfortable financial and social situation in their private life ?

How is this even relevant? You provide a service to the company and they pay you for it, they can decide not to do business with you and vice versa. Empathy has little to no place in business, unless it generates more profit of course.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#374

Post by benjaminsuch »

Rainymood wrote: post #373
antpls wrote: post #265

I don't understand how anyone in the world accept such social contract of being laid off anytime for arbitrary reasons. If you create a company, you take care of it and all of its members. If you have to cut expenses because the company needs to be "leaner" then you cut the salaries starting from the top executives. Eventually you fire management, because the state of the company is in part the result of their decisi…

>laid off anytime for arbitrary reasons. You can also leave for any arbitrary reason, anything else is slavery, simply put. This goes both ways. >If you create a company, you take care of it and all of its members. If you create a company, you have a fiduciary duty towards your shareholders. A company only exist when it is profitable (either now or in the future) and it can only continue to exist if it can do so prof…

"...anything else is slavery" What?

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#375

Post by the8472 »

aristophenes wrote: post #369
antpls wrote: post #265

I don't understand how anyone in the world accept such social contract of being laid off anytime for arbitrary reasons. If you create a company, you take care of it and all of its members. If you have to cut expenses because the company needs to be "leaner" then you cut the salaries starting from the top executives. Eventually you fire management, because the state of the company is in part the result of their decisi…

Two points in rebuttal. First, companies can expand more confidently if they know they can reduce more easily if they need to. It is more efficient for companies to be able to right-size themselves. Bolstering this point of view is that the USA has a 4% unemployment rate, which is about as low as you can get without things starting to break down. The US economy has been outperforming almost everyone too, creating mor…

> Bolstering this point of view is that the USA has a 4% unemployment rate

As a counterpoint, Germany has much stronger employee protection laws and unions and has a comparable unemployment rate. That said, resizing is still possible there, it just has some lag.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#376

Post by indymike »

candiodari wrote: post #340
unethical_ban wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So cut from the top down, period? Cut the people with the vision and strategy of the company, until nothing but the assemblers and forklift drivers are left? I believe in worker rights, and the ability of a person to live in relative economic security. But should a company not EVER be able to restructure when it realizes it has too many workers, or too broad a mission? Is 2 months pay and medical not a decent send-of…

It's funny how you assume there'a choice. Unemployment in Europe as a whole (including Eastern Europe) is ~20%. Depends on what/when exactly of course but it is. Government (non-productive by definition, by which I mean they don't add value, not that they're not useful) is easily half of the remainder. So Europe has 40% value-adding employees among the working age population, which is about half the total population,…

If human life is only valued by economic output, we've failed as a species.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#377

Post by russellbeattie »

aristophenes wrote: post #369
antpls wrote: post #265

I don't understand how anyone in the world accept such social contract of being laid off anytime for arbitrary reasons. If you create a company, you take care of it and all of its members. If you have to cut expenses because the company needs to be "leaner" then you cut the salaries starting from the top executives. Eventually you fire management, because the state of the company is in part the result of their decisi…

Two points in rebuttal. First, companies can expand more confidently if they know they can reduce more easily if they need to. It is more efficient for companies to be able to right-size themselves. Bolstering this point of view is that the USA has a 4% unemployment rate, which is about as low as you can get without things starting to break down. The US economy has been outperforming almost everyone too, creating mor…

That 4% number is complete crap, and you know it. Even if it was accurate, which it isn't, 48% of the U.S. earn less than $30k a year [1] with few benefits. Corporations need to be flexible, but they also need to provide stable long-term employment so our society can grow and prosper.

When Henry Ford launched the Model T, he made sure to pay his workers $5 a day so they could actually afford to buy the cars. It was an ethical choice as much as a business decision. Would SpaceX run out of money without cutting that 10%? Very doubtful, so why do it? Because MBAs decided that's what needed to be done based on today's morally bankrupt standard for running a business.

It's sad, really, that a company with such incredible vision of the future such as SpaceX can still be so short sighted when it comes to social responsibility.

1. https://howmuch.net/articles/how-much-americans-make-in-wage...

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#378

Post by pbhjpbhj »

deelowe wrote: post #210
entee wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been at a company where the 1-1 firings occurred over a morning. I was fortunate to keep my job, but I can tell you it was a pretty awful day for those staying (obviously not as bad as for those leaving :(). There's no good way to do this, layoffs of this sort are awful. I actually am not sure this is better or worse. You have a horrible Friday night, with untold stress, but at least you're not sweating at your…

There is a right way to do this. You announce it to the staff and at the same time you let those affected know. It's best to do this at the end of the day. Telling people "you may or may not still have a job, you'll get an email within the next 72 hours" is ridiculous. So what happens if it's Monday morning and I didn't get an email? Am I still employed? What if there was a glitch? What if I show up and I'm escorted…

Can't you email those not listed for termination, at the same time, and tell them they still have their job.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#379

Post by pas »

aristophenes wrote: post #369
antpls wrote: post #265

I don't understand how anyone in the world accept such social contract of being laid off anytime for arbitrary reasons. If you create a company, you take care of it and all of its members. If you have to cut expenses because the company needs to be "leaner" then you cut the salaries starting from the top executives. Eventually you fire management, because the state of the company is in part the result of their decisi…

Two points in rebuttal. First, companies can expand more confidently if they know they can reduce more easily if they need to. It is more efficient for companies to be able to right-size themselves. Bolstering this point of view is that the USA has a 4% unemployment rate, which is about as low as you can get without things starting to break down. The US economy has been outperforming almost everyone too, creating mor…

The economic performance and prosperity creation might not be that directly linked. GDP is not a good measure for prosperity of individuals (households). Sure, better than nothing, but there are a lot better ones available. Such as the AHDI - adjusted household disposable income.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#380

Post by alan-crowe »

antpls wrote: post #265

I don't understand how anyone in the world accept such social contract of being laid off anytime for arbitrary reasons. If you create a company, you take care of it and all of its members. If you have to cut expenses because the company needs to be "leaner" then you cut the salaries starting from the top executives. Eventually you fire management, because the state of the company is in part the result of their decisi…

There is a bigger picture in which employers intermediate between producers and consumers. As a consumer, you are free to shop around. You bought a Ford, but perhaps next time you buy a Honda. If the government is really serious about saying that Ford cannot lay off workers, the government has to help. For example, by introducing a tax on importing Hondas.

In the big picture, your job security as a producer trades-off against your right to be a disloyal consumer.

Post reply on HN