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

Normalising Layoffs/Firing

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 253 posts

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#181

Post by Jochim »

scarface74 wrote: post #143
AndrewThrowaway wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just so wrong on so many levels. > If you can be fired easily, you will find a job easily. Unless it is another economical crisis and nobody is hiring? > In Europe where firing is almost impossible It is called "job security" - if you hired somebody, you "promised" them to pay a wage. If they are not needed anymore, you need to keep on promise and pay a wage. For at least some time. E.g. a few month of salary…

> For at least some time. E.g. a few month of salary seems reasonable because a person has planned his future with you, now he needs to find a new job which will take some time. I realize I speak from a privileged position as a software developer. But never since the first day that I stepped into an office as a professional software developer in June of 1996 did I “plan a future” with a company. My plan was always to…

> I realize I speak from a privileged position as a software developer. But never since the first day that I stepped into an office as a professional software developer in June of 1996 did I “plan a future” with a company.

If you can acknowledge that you're in a more secure position, why then argue for the treatment of those less fortunate based on the security that's been afforded to you by your particular set of circumstances?

> 2008 was worse. But as a developer, you could find a contract somewhere if you had a network.

The economy consists of more than just developers. Unemployment spiked in 2008 and many people were unable to find work after having been fired.

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#182

Post by catothedev »

xyproto wrote: post #99
cyrusshepard wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment seems to assume that 1) employment levels for software engineers is the same in India 2) that the OP has overstated the social stigma of layoffs in India, and finally 3) the current employment landscape that you find yourself in will last indefinitely. Based on this, I suspect it's highly likely the hubris in this comment will not age well.

Regarding 3), I believe that solving problems and creating systems will always be relevant.

True. In fact, at my last interview they looked hard at my resume and then asked, "And so why should we hire you?".

I snapped off my sunglasses and, trying to contain my annoyance, said, "Guys, I solve problems and create systems."

After a long moment of silence, they looked at each other and nodded in approval. The boss reached out his hand to shake mine. I was hired.

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#183

Post by junon »

ttoinou wrote: post #160
junon wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's pretty clear they were referring to the EU. No need for semantics wars.

Calling the EU Europe is made on purpose to conflate the two and make it obvious that all countries should unite into this political union. I think it is very useful to point that to people who conflate the two terms

I think that's putting words into peoples' mouths.

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#184

Post by rvense »

wincy wrote: post #126
rvense wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely not true in Denmark. A good reason can be something like "we are eliminating this position for strategic reasons", and the only money it will cost you is the three-six months (depending on how long they've been at the company) that you have to keep paying them, during which they are required to work as normal and act loyally.

Isn’t that slavery with extra steps? What if I moved out of the country? This seems bizarre to me as an American. I’d do as little work as possible for that time and be resentful about it.

> Isn’t that slavery with extra steps?

That's a pretty wild comparison?

> What if I moved out of the country? This seems bizarre to me as an American. I’d do as little work as possible for that time and be resentful about it.

Well, things are usually a little more relaxed during that period. The employer is also required to make accommodations for you to find a new job, e.g. allow time off to go to interviews. As for leaving the country or not showing up, sure, the company might have grounds to sue and they could certainly stop paying you in that case, but, y'know, generally people act like adults.

There are exceptions to this rule about notices, so a day-to-day firing is possible in extreme circumstances. Like if you're not showing up at all, or blatantly not doing your job, are violent etc., you can be banished from the workplace and not paid from that day. But the point is, if you've been doing your job and get fired, you have the option to be at least somewhat reasonable about it and in return you get three months to find your feet and move on. By far most people take this.

Also, in the converse situation, where it's you who wish to leave, the rule is that you give at least one month's notice. This is sometimes not what you want, of course, but I think most people view it as a fair and reasonable trade, especially in light of the rules about getting fired.

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#185

Post by oblio »

mathverse wrote: post #133
tsimionescu wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In Europe where firing is almost impossible, hiring is a very tedious process. I don't know where you got this idea, but, at least in tech, the most infamous 7 rounds of whiteboard interviews stories I've heard are from Silicon Valley, not Europe. The company I work for (a Romanian branch of a US company - and yes, Romania has all the same legal protections against t firing as most of Europe) typically does one tec…

Your perception is skewed because Romania is a hotspot for companies to outsource to. There's a lot of companies hiring in Romania and the employers are not as picky.

His point was, and I can confirm this, in Europe companies generally have simpler interviews.

Frequently, especially for seniors, it's a technical chat. I have anecdata from about 6 European countries.

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#186

Post by cassianoleal »

ttoinou wrote: post #160
junon wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's pretty clear they were referring to the EU. No need for semantics wars.

Calling the EU Europe is made on purpose to conflate the two and make it obvious that all countries should unite into this political union. I think it is very useful to point that to people who conflate the two terms

Similarly, calling the USA "America" to conflate it with the rest of the continent in order to drive their idea of Latin America being "the back yard of the USA", or, more recently "the front yard".

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#187

Post by cm2187 »

mola wrote: post #168
alchemist1e9 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDP per capita is an interesting number and I was quiet surprised recently when I compared US and European cities and countries. For those who haven’t the spoiler is the US is significantly higher. Most pro-EU economic narratives are on pretty shaky ground even before recent developments.

What does gdp per Capita means when inequalities are very high?

I am not sure inequalities are that high in the US. They certainly are if you compare the absolute extremes of the distribution (Musk to a homeless drug addict), but beyond 2% percentile each side they are not that high.

There was an interesting talk on this topic [1]. What they argue is that the statistics used in the US to measure income inequality are misleading as they don’t account for taxes and benefits. The gap is greatly reduced if you do.

In any case, poverty is usually the issue, not inequality.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL1DSo_gvK4

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#188

Post by Jochim »

atemerev wrote: post #64
AndrewThrowaway wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just so wrong on so many levels. > If you can be fired easily, you will find a job easily. Unless it is another economical crisis and nobody is hiring? > In Europe where firing is almost impossible It is called "job security" - if you hired somebody, you "promised" them to pay a wage. If they are not needed anymore, you need to keep on promise and pay a wage. For at least some time. E.g. a few month of salary…

> If you can be fired easily, you will find a job easily. If there is another economic crisis and nobody is hiring, preventing companies to fire people will make the crisis even worse. > It is called "job security" An outdated concept of the XX century. No such thing in the post-industrial society. > Unless you count all the mom and pop cafes all over the Mediterranean? They are closing by thousands now, like in ever…

> If there is another economic crisis and nobody is hiring, preventing companies to fire people will make the crisis even worse.

Companies that know firing is difficult will hire less aggressively. They are also more likely to accept a deeper reduction in profits before laying people off. The result is a higher threshold of economic instability before the company lets people go. The US approach is like playing speed Jenga, you build something that will inevitably collapse.

Mass layoffs only serve to deepen an economic crisis. You remove a huge sum of disposable income from the economy which only contributes to more closures/layoffs. The result is an increased concentration of assets in the hands of those with the most access to capital during the crisis.

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#189

Post by deelly »

diabolus wrote: post #59

"They are relying on me. If I mess up, I affect lives of 400 to 600 people. That keeps me awake." This is something I heard many times. And the most of the time, companies with this motto are underpaying and don't give a proper wage to employees to make any passive income or any investment to become less depended on the job. And this motto becomes an excuse for overtime and workload in bad times. A professional work…

A lot of "should, must, have"... What if "could not, can't, don't have"? Sorry, just to clarify, your point is that this behavior is absolutely normal?

Re: Normalising Layoffs/Firing

#190

Post by alchemist1e9 »

cm2187 wrote: post #187
mola wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does gdp per Capita means when inequalities are very high?

I am not sure inequalities are that high in the US. They certainly are if you compare the absolute extremes of the distribution (Musk to a homeless drug addict), but beyond 2% percentile each side they are not that high. There was an interesting talk on this topic [1]. What they argue is that the statistics used in the US to measure income inequality are misleading as they don’t account for taxes and benefits. The ga…

I don’t have a reference handy but there was also recently sn analysis that concluded immigration significantly skews the numbers when comparing inequity to EU nations. The US has significant immigration on the bottom end and also on the top end.
Post reply on HN