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

Twitter Layoff Started Today

linkedin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 355 posts

Re: Twitter Layoff Started Today

#331

Post by akaij »

mceachen wrote: post #322
rufus_foreman wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I'm not that old, but even I remember a time when companies, at least in principle, would invest in their employees (via stable employment, regular raises, mutual trust) in return for employees investing in the companies (innovation, extra effort, dedication, championing the company brand) Well I am old, and I don't remember the time you claim to recall. I've never championed a company brand and I just threw up in…

I'm old too. I don't think we're old _enough_. According to my grandparents, back in the late 1940s through early 60s, I guess it wasn't rare for people to work at a _single_ company _for the entirety of their career_, fostering bi-directional loyalty.

This is still the case in Japan.

Re: Twitter Layoff Started Today

#332

Post by 6510 »

gwerbret wrote: post #200

> So- in addition to losing their jobs, which Twitter assured employees would not happen I'm not that old, but even I remember a time when companies, at least in principle, would invest in their employees (via stable employment, regular raises, mutual trust) in return for employees investing in the companies (innovation, extra effort, dedication, championing the company brand). Today, we have this: - Companies using…

People can stop buying products that don't agree with them. It might not be in your financial cards but if it is a free product there is no excuse - it makes good business sense.

Re: Twitter Layoff Started Today

#333

Post by 6510 »

mceachen wrote: post #322
rufus_foreman wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I'm not that old, but even I remember a time when companies, at least in principle, would invest in their employees (via stable employment, regular raises, mutual trust) in return for employees investing in the companies (innovation, extra effort, dedication, championing the company brand) Well I am old, and I don't remember the time you claim to recall. I've never championed a company brand and I just threw up in…

I'm old too. I don't think we're old _enough_. According to my grandparents, back in the late 1940s through early 60s, I guess it wasn't rare for people to work at a _single_ company _for the entirety of their career_, fostering bi-directional loyalty.

For many generations was even a thing.

Re: Twitter Layoff Started Today

#334

Post by mkr-hn »

kamaal wrote: post #327
AlbertCory wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dad worked at a single company for his whole career (45 years). Nonetheless, when I left my first job, he was supportive. He said "They're not loyal to you, so why should you be loyal to them?"

>>They're not loyal to you, so why should you be loyal to them? This always comes up in such discussions, but who exactly is They here. Company isn't a conscious entity, its the people. And those people are likely saying the same things about They as you/we are. The real deal here is we have 100% ownership of any situation in life, and we are not loyal to ourselves, given this obvious fact. If you have an opportunity…

My impression from reading various accounts from people with long careers in tech is that the stuff that compounds also transfers. You don't take the obsolete frameworks and libraries with you (for example), but you take what you learned about frameworks and libraries.

Re: Twitter Layoff Started Today

#335

Post by oblio »

WalterBright wrote: post #247
gwerbret wrote: post #200

> So- in addition to losing their jobs, which Twitter assured employees would not happen I'm not that old, but even I remember a time when companies, at least in principle, would invest in their employees (via stable employment, regular raises, mutual trust) in return for employees investing in the companies (innovation, extra effort, dedication, championing the company brand). Today, we have this: - Companies using…

> Companies literally escorting laid-off employees out of the building like criminals, on the premise that a suddenly-former employee is an incipient criminal. It doesn't take many incipient criminals to ruin things for everyone. You'd do it to if you've ever had an employee steal or embezzle from you, and it's a lot more common than you might think.

This is almost strictly a US perspective.

At some point you'd figure out Americans would look around the world and start asking: "are we sure we're doing this right?".

In every place in Europe I know of, you're not escorted outside of the building by anyone. You just go at a leisurely pace and drop off your badge and stuff, put your stuff in a bag, etc.

Re: Twitter Layoff Started Today

#336

Post by mkr-hn »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #203
onionisafruit wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still prefer the old word, "Personnel". I never understood rebranding to Human Resources.

Too many people identify as non-persons. I'm not sure if I'm joking either.

This is a thing, but not very common in professional settings. All the it/its entities I've met were cool, so I wouldn't mind one as a coworker.

Re: Twitter Layoff Started Today

#337

Post by mkr-hn »

deltarholamda wrote: post #78
redact207 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"recruitment", since labelling humans as resources is apparently inhumane

Did you just assume their humanity? You need to take a remedial course on treating Entities of Other Existence with respect. We'll have to get back to you on when you can register, we're a little under-entitied in the Carbon-Based Respirating Encouragement and Retention Department.

2014 called. It wants its humor back.

Re: Twitter Layoff Started Today

#338

Post by notch656a »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #176
notch656a wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only 16% of SF is families with children, so that's not really representative of someone living there.

That's a valid objection to two whole words of my comment. On the flip side, 99% of SF is people who live in homes. Most of those people will have more than a backpack's worth of stuff to move.

Unless you're moving to the bush in Alaska or the desert in Namibia or something, or have some weird medical issue that requires you to bring some large special life-saving item with you for the journey, then you're in the 99% that can survive just fine selling your stuff where you are and then buying necessities when you arrive. I said doable, not that you could do it while keeping grandma's heirloom piano.

Re: Twitter Layoff Started Today

#339

Post by AlbertCory »

kamaal wrote: post #327
AlbertCory wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dad worked at a single company for his whole career (45 years). Nonetheless, when I left my first job, he was supportive. He said "They're not loyal to you, so why should you be loyal to them?"

>>They're not loyal to you, so why should you be loyal to them? This always comes up in such discussions, but who exactly is They here. Company isn't a conscious entity, its the people. And those people are likely saying the same things about They as you/we are. The real deal here is we have 100% ownership of any situation in life, and we are not loyal to ourselves, given this obvious fact. If you have an opportunity…

I'm not even sure I even understand what you're saying here. It seems kinda all over the place.

"This always comes up" -- really? You always hear quotes from 60+ year old people? Somehow I doubt that.

This came from someone with a lifetime's worth of experience from one company. Naturally he might have had different experiences with a different company, but on the other hand, he at least knew people from all over.

Post reply on HN