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

Google execs threaten workers with layoffs: ‘There will be blood on the streets’

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 73 posts

Re: Google execs threaten workers with layoffs: ‘There will be blood on the streets’

#11

Post by aetherson »

IceMetalPunk wrote: post #8
Ferrotin wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unproductive employees aren’t the ones quitting.

...I mean, all I have to go on is my own experience and what I've seen from the workers around me, but your claim doesn't line up with that data at all. For instance, my team just lost three (out of 8) of its most talented and most productive developers (including our lead developer) who quit over corporate policy changes, including WFH changes. Obviously, to reiterate, this is a small sample size and sampling bias,…

Your claim supports your parent's claim -- that the productive employees are the ones quitting, and the unproductive ones are those who are not quitting.

Re: Google execs threaten workers with layoffs: ‘There will be blood on the streets’

#12

Post by nh23423fefe »

Ferrotin wrote: post #5
IceMetalPunk wrote: post #2

Can someone explain how burning out your employees, freezing hirings, possibly laying off a large number of your employees, in a market where people are actively quitting en masse... is supposed to increase productivity? Or are company execs just under the impression that "the beatings will continue until morale improves" was seriously good leadership advice?

The unproductive employees aren’t the ones quitting.

the denominator is afraid

Re: Google execs threaten workers with layoffs: ‘There will be blood on the streets’

#13

Post by IceMetalPunk »

arberx wrote: post #9
IceMetalPunk wrote: post #2

Can someone explain how burning out your employees, freezing hirings, possibly laying off a large number of your employees, in a market where people are actively quitting en masse... is supposed to increase productivity? Or are company execs just under the impression that "the beatings will continue until morale improves" was seriously good leadership advice?

> actively quitting en masse won't happen in a downturn/recession. Employers will have all the leverage.

It is currently happening shrug

Re: Google execs threaten workers with layoffs: ‘There will be blood on the streets’

#14

Post by IceMetalPunk »

aetherson wrote: post #11
IceMetalPunk wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...I mean, all I have to go on is my own experience and what I've seen from the workers around me, but your claim doesn't line up with that data at all. For instance, my team just lost three (out of 8) of its most talented and most productive developers (including our lead developer) who quit over corporate policy changes, including WFH changes. Obviously, to reiterate, this is a small sample size and sampling bias,…

Your claim supports your parent's claim -- that the productive employees are the ones quitting, and the unproductive ones are those who are not quitting.

Yep, I misread; my bad. I edited my reply.

Re: Google execs threaten workers with layoffs: ‘There will be blood on the streets’

#15

Post by icedchai »

IceMetalPunk wrote: post #2

Can someone explain how burning out your employees, freezing hirings, possibly laying off a large number of your employees, in a market where people are actively quitting en masse... is supposed to increase productivity? Or are company execs just under the impression that "the beatings will continue until morale improves" was seriously good leadership advice?

I know guys who've gone from job to job basically doing nothing, just collecting a fat check. It's incredible how much dead weight there is in these companies.

Re: Google execs threaten workers with layoffs: ‘There will be blood on the streets’

#16

Post by IceMetalPunk »

aetherson wrote: post #10
IceMetalPunk wrote: post #2

Can someone explain how burning out your employees, freezing hirings, possibly laying off a large number of your employees, in a market where people are actively quitting en masse... is supposed to increase productivity? Or are company execs just under the impression that "the beatings will continue until morale improves" was seriously good leadership advice?

People aren't quitting en masse.

If you Google "tech industry quitting", all the results seem to paint a different picture. Some articles even call it "The Great Resignation".

Re: Google execs threaten workers with layoffs: ‘There will be blood on the streets’

#17

Post by IceMetalPunk »

icedchai wrote: post #15
IceMetalPunk wrote: post #2

Can someone explain how burning out your employees, freezing hirings, possibly laying off a large number of your employees, in a market where people are actively quitting en masse... is supposed to increase productivity? Or are company execs just under the impression that "the beatings will continue until morale improves" was seriously good leadership advice?

I know guys who've gone from job to job basically doing nothing, just collecting a fat check. It's incredible how much dead weight there is in these companies.

And... how is that relevant?

Re: Google execs threaten workers with layoffs: ‘There will be blood on the streets’

#18

Post by 3throwaway3141 »

IceMetalPunk wrote: post #2

Can someone explain how burning out your employees, freezing hirings, possibly laying off a large number of your employees, in a market where people are actively quitting en masse... is supposed to increase productivity? Or are company execs just under the impression that "the beatings will continue until morale improves" was seriously good leadership advice?

I'm a tech worker and I have found the market to be as friendly as ever; I expect to get multiple offers as per usual.

Re: Google execs threaten workers with layoffs: ‘There will be blood on the streets’

#19

Post by calrueb »

This threat seems to be specifically about sales not meeting quota, and therefore the Google Cloud org not meeting its revenue goals. I suppose one interpretation is that the sales compensation structure is flawed, and not incentivizing sellers to do their best work. If so, sales leadership should be held partly accountable. However, I suspect sales is likely the scapegoat here for deeper issues with the product and how it compares with alternatives.
Post reply on HN