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

Meta and Google are cutting staff

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 408 posts

Re: Meta and Google are cutting staff

#161

Post by dzikimarian »

game_the0ry wrote: post #15

I can't read WSJ while at work, but after checking on the financials for both Meta and Alphabet, I do not understand why either would be cutting staff. Both look pretty strong, so I am not sure how cuts are justified or why Zuckerberg has a negative outlook, especially since 2021 was such a great year for both. Do American executives, investors, and start up owners not have the guts for even a moderate stock price dr…

>Do American executives, investors, and start up owners not have the guts for even a moderate stock price drop?

But why should they? If staff being cut is low performers, as companies stated, then it would be equivalent to burning money for no reason.

Re: Meta and Google are cutting staff

#162

Post by Infinitesimus »

mistrial9 wrote: post #133
Infinitesimus wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh but they did! Meta leadership has always anticipated this risk. The problem is that they have not been able to fully mitigate it. Facebook Phone (rebranded HTC) was released in 2013 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_First but had poor sales. The metaverse is their next play to build a world where they are a bit more shielded from Apple/Google/Microsoft's hardware influence. Pivoting a large business is really hard…

I appreciate when people inside FB/Meta speak directly like this (as someone who loathes the Metaverse project)

To clarify, I'm not affiliated with Meta. Just an internet nerd who likes following how organizations think and evolve

Re: Meta and Google are cutting staff

#163

Post by dzikimarian »

nonethewiser wrote: post #138
rosywoozlechan wrote: post #26

Some of these comments mentioned in the article coming from Meta's leadership about there being people who shouldn't probably be there or to get rid of coasters seems so inhumane and demoralizing. What kind of leadership is that? I mean it's understandable that businesses have to cut costs, but have some empathy, and understand how words affect people. Just wow. It's so cynical and depressing.

It also suggests that they have known about slackers and have been OK with it. 1. Very unlikely. Which means they're lying. 2. They are incompetent for keeping people that are slacking If people are truly just slacking off then they should be let go as part of the normal business process. This focused effort to get leaner suggests that there are many known slackers that they were OK with up to this point. There is re…

Everybody is incompetent about detecting slackers for last two years. I've seen multiple people having two or even three full time contracts and successfully juggling tasks at minimal required level, due to remote work and flexible hours. I guess they'll finally spoil it for everyone.

Re: Meta and Google are cutting staff

#164

Post by lordswork »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #116

> Google has required some employees to apply for new jobs is this the new way to say "fired"?

I don't understand how the article states this and concludes Google is cutting staff:

>A Google spokesman said almost 95% of employees who expressed interest in staying with the company found new roles within the notice period. Alphabet had 174,014 employees at the end of the second quarter, up 20.8% from the previous year.

Re: Meta and Google are cutting staff

#165

Post by sequoia »

Facebook and google have "required some employees to apply for new jobs if they wish to remain at the company."

I have to say this is a sort of hilarious newspeak framing of layoffs. "We're not laying you off, you just need to apply and get accepted for a job or else you're terminated." OK, so I was a job-haver, now I'm a job-seeker... but at least I haven't been laid off!

Re: Meta and Google are cutting staff

#166

Post by deelowe »

sequoia wrote: post #165

Facebook and google have "required some employees to apply for new jobs if they wish to remain at the company." I have to say this is a sort of hilarious newspeak framing of layoffs. "We're not laying you off, you just need to apply and get accepted for a job or else you're terminated." OK, so I was a job-haver, now I'm a job-seeker... but at least I haven't been laid off!

Assumption being, if you can't pass interviews with another team, you're not good enough to stay. That only works for large campuses and of course, getting another role is more indicative of your networking abilities than skillset and experience.

Re: Meta and Google are cutting staff

#167

Post by bin_bash »

piva00 wrote: post #146
bin_bash wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you talking about "Metamates"—if so I said that ironically. I don't think I've ever heard anyone outside of the execs use that term when they weren't being sarcastic.

No, I meant in the case of "meets most" being used in an extremely negative connotation.

ah apologies, I'm not sure why I didn't read that correctly the first time. It's wrong to call it "extremely negative" though, my words were "pretty bad". There are 2 levels lower than MM but they're rarely used.

MM is a warning—it means you need to improve or you'll likely be put on a PIP.

Re: Meta and Google are cutting staff

#168

Post by ihaveajob »

sequoia wrote: post #165

Facebook and google have "required some employees to apply for new jobs if they wish to remain at the company." I have to say this is a sort of hilarious newspeak framing of layoffs. "We're not laying you off, you just need to apply and get accepted for a job or else you're terminated." OK, so I was a job-haver, now I'm a job-seeker... but at least I haven't been laid off!

I see it as a last chance to move to a position that's not being terminated, and also an opportunity for someone who needs headcount and has the budget for it to pick proven candidates without the hassle of an external hire. Large companies are worlds of their own. But still, I imagine if you receive that message, I'd be worried.

Re: Meta and Google are cutting staff

#169

Post by karmasimida »

baby wrote: post #80
ras3022 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but the future is uncertain and when you’re selling ads it’s hard to control revenue. It’s much easier to control expenses.

> the future is uncertain much less uncertain than any other companies IMO. They're printing money.

I mean how? Advertising expenses drain much faster in down turn.

Re: Meta and Google are cutting staff

#170

Post by BoorishBears »

pianoben wrote: post #89
BoorishBears wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's nowhere near the same as "stack ranking" in the way that the term generally used in the tech industry... I wouldn't want to work somewhere at FB scale that doesn't grade you on the curve of other engineers in your department and level, once your departments are large enough that's exactly how it should work. What's problematic is forcefully defining X percent as being low performing, the comparison to peers is…

By definition, that's how "grading on a curve" works. You fit your population to the curve. Some end up at the extremities.

My entire point is that grading on a curve is not the same "defining the curve such that X% of our people are at the low end".

The curve is defined by the organization. They can carefully examine it, refine it, backtrack how it's performed... or you can have someone clueless hear that so and so company fires Y percent, so let's tweak the curve until Y percent are at the "extremities"

Post reply on HN