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

451–460 of 557 posts

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#451

Post by kurthr »

HeadsUpHigh wrote: post #399
roedog wrote: post #208

The SoCal aerospace job market is hot right now. The driver is multiple large program starts at multiple contractors who are competing for people. This should make it possible for everyone to land on their feet. (I've reached out to my former colleagues who left to join Space X) What's odd is why SpaceX is cutting staff with the new development underway on the larger rockets and the satellite business. I'm curious ab…

SpaceX switched from carbon fiber construction for their next rocket to stainless steel. My guess is at least a big part of this workforce reduction relates to people involved in cf which are no longer needed. Additionally they had a lot of people working on crew dragon which as it now nears it's launch might not be needed any more( e.g. pica heatshield, electronics, software developers etc). Same goes for the now ma…

I just don't buy the Carbon Fiber vs Stainless construction. They aren't used for the same thing (low weight structural stiffness vs heat conduction, radiation & appearance).

From what I understand it was a water tank contactor that did the hopper in Boca Chica... and it will never face lanch/re-entry stresses. That won't replace anyone.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#452

Post by kire_says »

akiselev wrote: post #426
aristophenes wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My comments had nothing to do with a minimum wage discussion, and I doubt SpaceX employs people for even near to minimum wage. This is a company that creates rather high wage jobs. It is also doing very risky things. If the USA had stricter rules about employment protection and all that came with it, Spacex would not exist at all, and the 90% of well paid employees that remain wouldn’t have gotten these jobs. The abi…

[flagged]

> They're equivalent to third world countries with infrastructure held together by duct tape and spit

This is deeply hyperbolic.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#453

Post by sitkack »

njarboe wrote: post #441
sitkack wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they can't justify keeping those people around I would have put them on other Musk projects to keep them from going to the competition. SpaceX doesn't have a monopoly on low cost launch. The next place to figure out how to 3d print a tungsten titanium copper nickel chromium iron one piece rocket nozzle will also have that advantage.

If Musk is really more interested in getting humanity into space as soon as possible then padding his already large bankroll, having some competition can really keep people and companies focused on making quick progress. I have heard him say he would like some more companies competing with SpaceX in interviews for just this reason and his actions seem to suggest he his main goal in life really is making humanity a mu…

This is an interesting take, they weren't laid off, they graduated.

The same thing is used to train a talent pool in a vendor eco system, hire contractors to build demo apps and integrations, but cycle them out after every project. All those people can now put Tech X on their resume.

SpaceX definitely transformed the entire endeavor of space travel.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#454

Post by jamiek88 »

ryanmercer wrote: post #111
mulmen wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we know that is necessary? Why would it take all weekend for 700 emails to be delivered? Why not send an email to all the remaining employees to reassure them they are not being fired? That may have happened, we don't know.

From the reddit comment there's no indication they said when they will be sending the email. It would have been far more practical to quietly go into each department "Jane, Jack come with us we're putting together a team" "Sally, Quan come with us we're putting together a team" take them all to an area "we're very sorry but we have to lay you off, we have counselors that we can refer to you if you need to talk to som…

That sounds terrible.

Start the process with a lie finish it with asking them to do some work?!

You've just been sucker punched with new team yay! wait not really you’re fired! Now please finish that document you were writing and GTFO.

What? Please think more carefully than this if you are ever in the position of influencing layoffs or delivering the news.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#455

Post by roedog »

Robotbeat wrote: post #232
roedog wrote: post #208

The SoCal aerospace job market is hot right now. The driver is multiple large program starts at multiple contractors who are competing for people. This should make it possible for everyone to land on their feet. (I've reached out to my former colleagues who left to join Space X) What's odd is why SpaceX is cutting staff with the new development underway on the larger rockets and the satellite business. I'm curious ab…

SpaceX has like 7000 employees, about twice as many as ULA (their domestic competitor). There are reasons why (Dragon, BFR, Starlink, in-house engines, higher flightrate, more in-house everything), but that's a lot of people. What I hope is we'll see new startups form out of these folk. What I'd like to see is an ESOP/co-op newspace company bent on similar goals. A lot of these employees have vested stock (or likely…

Well, Space X costs less than half than a ULA launch. I suspect that ULA spends that additional money on large sub-contracts to Boeing and Lockheed for the Delta and Atlas vehicles. This makes me think that when we add up the employees on the subcontracts the space X staffing number will be much more impressive in it's leanness.

I hope they all join my company, we've got a lot of work they would find interesting. With the retirement rate increasing it's the time to change things for the better. I want their experience at Space X on how to do things faster and better. But perhaps that's wishful thinking...

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#456

Post by ambicapter »

roenxi wrote: post #409
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 op…

Strictly speaking, Capitalism says that the Capitalists get to choose which option they go with. In a system with healthy incentives, we might expect Option 1 to be the sensible capitalist equilibrium, because capital needs to be maintained and the builders/maintainers become the same people. Don't forget that, in theory, the workers can become capitalists themselves if they aren't getting a good share of the benefit…

You don't "become" capitalist, a capitalist has capital, and if you don't have any capital, you're not a capitalist.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#457

Post by drieddust »

nullifidian wrote: post #295
drieddust wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Termination due to non-performance on the job is entirely different from at will termination which can hit a performer and non performer alike. You seems to imply employees are the resources to be used to achieve goals. I do not see an issue in this arrangement if Employees have the same negotiation power as the employer.

>Termination due to non-performance on the job is entirely different from at will termination which can hit a performer and non performer alike. Termination due to non-performance can also hit a performer. Human beigns and hence their social systems are not perfect. N% layoff is performance related termination, because it's an impossibility that all employees pefrorm at the same level, are of the same value to the co…

> Termination due to non-performance can also hit a performer.

If everyone is meeting the success criteria, then still trying to fire lower 10% is Darwinian view of the world. This also means objective enough criteria exists to judge the poor performers. In reality, that guy in the corner with his head down get fired because he is too busy to make connections and show how valuable he is.

This specific case seems harsher because a lot of these people assembled under Mr. Musk's banner because they thought they were working for a cause. I am sure many of them have took paycuts, toiled above and beyond expectations because they thought they were working for a cause. In my view this is not a fair at all.

> They are. Within the constrains of culture and law.

Agreed but every lawful and culturally acceptable things are not right necessarily.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#458

Post by someguydave »

whatshisface wrote: post #6

10% is a big fraction. How often do large, stable companies execute a layoff like that? Sometimes layoffs can be not so bad, for example when that's the company's way of clearing off the managers' firing wishlist without incurring legal trouble. However at 10% of the workforce, this may be a change of direction away from R&D and towards sitting on the falcon 9 and launching to LEO.

Perhaps Musk wants to employ only the most committed zealots and pay them in hope.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#459

Post by rmdashrfstar »

ecshafer wrote: post #442
AdrianB1 wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is normal to layoff about 5% per year, you trim the one in the 20 that is the weakest and it has positive, not negative effects. Going to 10% is a bit stretch, but still workable. In the last companies I worked, if up to 20% of the people left one day it would have an immediate positive impact on the performance, less complexity to deal with and more focus to work on real stuff.

5% is insane, I would never work for a company that regularly laid off that many people. Firing under performers is one thing, but to systematically clear house is toxic. How are you supposed to build a career if one of your coworkers/friends is canned every year, so everyone is wondering what year is theirs? So people overwork themselves to make sure it doesn't happen to them. You need to show your employees safety,…

I think it's less about building a career and more about accomplishing the goals of the CEO and the company.

Re: SpaceX to lay off 10% of Workforce

#460

Post by TaylorAlexander »

7e wrote: post #447
MarcysVonEylau wrote: post #438

It all makes sense when you look at basic facts. Rocket reuse became a normal occurance, probably earlier than the majority of the industry anticipated. Their competitive pricing took the market by storm, changing the equation of sending anything to space. There are less new payloads to launch in 2019, because it takes much longer to contract and build a satellite than to send it to space, and the market hasn't yet a…

The launch market is very small and it's always taken longer to build a satellite than to provision the launch vehicle. These layoffs are a direct result of SpaceX's recent failures to raise money.

The key I think is that the launch rate has increased, but the market has a years long delay due to build times. The result is that the existing supply of launchable satellites has been consumed, so fewer launches are available to pay the bills.
Post reply on HN