Normalising Layoffs/Firing • Hacker News Board

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#31

Post by randomsearch » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 7:26 AM UTC

ttoinou wrote: post #11

Firing easily and hiring easily are two sides of the same coin. If you can be fired easily, you will find a job easily. If companies can go down quickly, new companies can be formed in an instant. In Europe where firing is almost impossible, hiring is a very tedious process. Companies are big and look financially stable because the little ones cannot survive or dont enjoy the same monopoly / legal protections. If a c…

> Firing easily and hiring easily are two sides of the same coin. If you can be fired easily, you will find a job easily

Yes, like 1930s America.

I guess you mean “you can be easily hired” rather than “you will find a job easily”. Very different things.

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#32

Post by acatton » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 7:26 AM UTC

ttoinou wrote: post #11

Firing easily and hiring easily are two sides of the same coin. If you can be fired easily, you will find a job easily. If companies can go down quickly, new companies can be formed in an instant. In Europe where firing is almost impossible, hiring is a very tedious process. Companies are big and look financially stable because the little ones cannot survive or dont enjoy the same monopoly / legal protections. If a c…

> In Europe where firing is almost impossible

Assuming you mean the European Union by "Europe", this is 27 countries with 27 labour laws. I don't think this can be generalized. Only trade laws were unified in the EU.

The labour laws diversity is made even wider if you include non EU countries like Switzerland or the Balkans.

Just as an example Denmark follows the concept of Flexisecurity[1], easy to fire, but there is a good government safety net which prevents people from falling into poverty, while trying as hard as possible to find them a new income.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexicurity

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#33

Post by bobthepanda » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 7:27 AM UTC

lostlogin wrote: post #19

ttoinou wrote: post #11

Firing easily and hiring easily are two sides of the same coin. If you can be fired easily, you will find a job easily. If companies can go down quickly, new companies can be formed in an instant. In Europe where firing is almost impossible, hiring is a very tedious process. Companies are big and look financially stable because the little ones cannot survive or dont enjoy the same monopoly / legal protections. If a c…

> If you can be fired easily, you will find a job easily. If companies can go down quickly, new companies can be formed in an instant. In New Zealand it is fairly easy to start a company (in the sense that the required paperwork isn’t too difficult). It’s easy to hire people, but firing is hard. Why would ease firing mean ease hiring? Why would companies failing easily mean start ups are simple? It’s not so much that…

usually the ease of hiring/firing bit is more of "hire the right person for the role", in the sense that a vacated spot can become available for another.

but also, there is a limited amount of capital in the economy, and so propping an "unhealthy" company up with debt will crowd out new, potentially successful businesses. If there are enough zombie companies around this is enough to paralyze an entire economy.

The general observation is that the US has less worker stability, but also bounces back faster than European countries. And the poster child for zombie companies strangling the economy by hoovering up all the credit is post-bubble Japan.

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#34

Post by the_optimist » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 7:27 AM UTC

Yet we meanwhile worship at the alter of the Fed, seeing only money increased and ruling toward wanton destruction, that individual lives must be sacrificed in reduced employ, consumption, and future.

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#35

Post by Fiahil » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 7:27 AM UTC

ttoinou wrote: post #11

Firing easily and hiring easily are two sides of the same coin. If you can be fired easily, you will find a job easily. If companies can go down quickly, new companies can be formed in an instant. In Europe where firing is almost impossible, hiring is a very tedious process. Companies are big and look financially stable because the little ones cannot survive or dont enjoy the same monopoly / legal protections. If a c…

> In Europe where firing is almost impossible, hiring is a very tedious process.

Europe is not a single country, anyway, here's what happen in France:

Firing is tedious, but not impossible. Hiring people is easy, but you enter into competition with higher salaries - like the US - for remote jobs.

> Firing easily and hiring easily are two sides of the same coin.

Not exactly, they diverge when firing is made more difficult.

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#36

Post by ttoinou » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 7:28 AM UTC

soptikha2 wrote: post #18

ttoinou wrote: post #11

Firing easily and hiring easily are two sides of the same coin. If you can be fired easily, you will find a job easily. If companies can go down quickly, new companies can be formed in an instant. In Europe where firing is almost impossible, hiring is a very tedious process. Companies are big and look financially stable because the little ones cannot survive or dont enjoy the same monopoly / legal protections. If a c…

My experience is quite different in regard to working in Europe. How exactly is hiring a very tedious process? Seemed quite fast and easy to me. And btw, it's not that hard to fire a wrong hire. You have few months to do so basically for any reason at all, and afterwards, you can still do it, if you have a good reason to do so.

After the probation you need a really good reason and it costs a lot of money / paperwork / worker's right etc.

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#37

Post by altacc » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 7:28 AM UTC

hparadiz wrote: post #12

xupybd wrote: post #7

Here in new Zealand it's next to impossible to fire someone. We only really do redundancies . If you were fired it must have been serious misconduct.

What happens when a company runs out of money? I'm seriously asking.

Not PP, but in countries where there is employment protection, a company can still officially downsize and make roles redundant and therefore layoff the people in these roles. Those in now redundant roles can technically apply for any new open roles created but either there aren't new roles or management has a good idea who it wants to be in that role.

This is actually similar to a lot of tech layoffs, where the company is laying off a large number of people to downsize the company and not rehiring other people into those roles.

Where employment protection and unions come in is areas like redundancy pay offs, including potentially retraining; and ensuring that redundancy is not used to target individuals (e.g. making a role redundant to lay someone off and then recreating that role to hire somebody else). If you want to fire somebody there needs to be good cause. Otherwise you "manage them out of the business" by making them unhappy whilst not performing constructive dismissal.

This was all a lot of hassle when I was running teams but on the upside, as a manager I was also just an employee and protected by the same laws.

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#38

Post by ttoinou » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 7:29 AM UTC

snovv_crash wrote: post #28

jfoster wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't really make logical sense to me. Can you elaborate? If hiring is an irreversible decision for a company, why wouldn't consideration be required prior to any hire?

There's usually a considerable probation period where the firing rules are much more relaxed. Germany is typically 6 months, for example.

Doesnt that make my point ? You can easily be fired in a probation period :-) and right before the probation ends is when the employer wonders if they should keep you (really hire you for good)

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#39

Post by HL33tibCe7 » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 7:29 AM UTC

ttoinou wrote: post #11

Firing easily and hiring easily are two sides of the same coin. If you can be fired easily, you will find a job easily. If companies can go down quickly, new companies can be formed in an instant. In Europe where firing is almost impossible, hiring is a very tedious process. Companies are big and look financially stable because the little ones cannot survive or dont enjoy the same monopoly / legal protections. If a c…

> In Europe

Tell me you’re an American without telling me you’re an American ;)

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#40

Post by jlund-molfese » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 7:29 AM UTC

zeruch wrote: post #4

"We have normalised firing of people." We spent decades in the US smashing unions, smashing pensions (replacing them with more volatile instruments like 401Ks) and made at-will employment dangerous for both sides of the equation. Firing has been trivialized for decades. This is not new, and the current wave is minuscule compared to 2008, 2000, and previous. The worst is yet to come.

Why would an employee in the tech sector prefer an employer-managed pension?

A 401(k) usually allows me to choose what I invest my money in (including bonds), and can be rolled over to a new employer easily. And it’s my money once it’s in my account, not my employer’s money. They can’t require me to work for a certain period of time to get it out, and don’t pay me less to compensate for offering the retirement benefit.