How come CEOs never get fired during layoffs? Laying off this much of the workforce is an indicator they have done their job poorly (I.e. failed to adequately forecast industry trends and demand). Any normal plebeian would be out the door in two minutes if they did something similar.
Stripe laying off around 14% of workforce
611–620 of 1001 posts
Re: Stripe laying off around 14% of workforce
#612Earlier quoted context omitted.
The second they go public it triggers a 6-12 months window after which all of their employees can cash out. This will, inexorably lead to an exodus of their most senior peeps, and when it happens, will probably be ground zero for the next gen of fintech startups. Delaying going IPO this way, amongst other things, is about retention.
I don’t think this is correct. Then your theory is that every tech company that went public in last 2 years have experienced a brain drain that Stripe has not. Lock up periods aren’t set in stone. They probably didn’t need to raise money and could have done a direct listing and let employees cash out immediately.
A "brain drain" doesn't just mean that people actually quit and leave. They can also dramatically ramp down the intensity because they are suddenly in a very comfortable financial position and the big risk they have been working so hard to avoid (losing their valuable equity for whatever reason) is off the table. It sucks, but that's the way it is for many people. It's hard to keep up the super high level of intensity after so long, especially when the downside case is mitigated by newfound financial independence.
Re: Stripe laying off around 14% of workforce
#613Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with that is that in some cases there's really nothing else someone can do. If they are a recruiter, and the company is no longer hiring, keeping that person around doesn't help anyone, including that person. Honestly the way Stripe is handling this seems pretty good. They are telling you now that you have until March to find a new job. They are essentially doing what you suggest, without making them come…
This might sound wild, but maybe the decent thing to do is if the company warns the team months in advance that a purge is coming. Let those who need to leave, leave. Quietly tell those who you really want to remain that they should not fear.
I have one friend at Stripe who, after the rumors started swirling that this was coming, was hoping they were going to get laid off today (they didn't), so now they're stuck in a job they don't want anymore, but don't have the headspace to effectively job hunt right now.
Imagine a world where the company had offered them the opportunity to quit with a buy out package, probably quite a bit healthier of a situation for all involved given this person's abysmal morale in their current role.
I see the "get paid to quit" trend from time to time and I think it's a great idea.
Re: Stripe laying off around 14% of workforce
#614Godspeed to any other college seniors looking for new grad roles! What a nightmare of a time to graduate.
Re: Stripe laying off around 14% of workforce
#615I work for Stripe and got laid off this morning. Sucks because my manager was only told this morning, and didn't have a chance to talk about how well I was doing or take any part in the decision making. We'll at least I'll get a break. I worked nights and weekends all of October.
This appears to be a trend. A while ago my project owner's role went "poof" and he was notified of this via email the same morning.
The weird bit is that company policy is to award a generous notice period during which... you're not allowed to do anything.
It's been half a year now - most of the benefits of that period(like salary) are gone. He still appears to have access to the office, but nothing to do there.
I don't understand how a company which has such a program for laid off people doesn't bother to notify them in advance.
Re: Stripe laying off around 14% of workforce
#616Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Sucks because my manager was only told this morning As a manager I find their really curious. I guess they were trying to avoid leaks. I wonder how they chose who to lay off. Most recent performance rating? Next level managers impression?
I have a number of friends who all work at Stripe and this was definitely a secret circulating among the staff for at least the last week or so, like well beyond the "I wonder if we'll also have layoffs" rumors going around at almost every tech co right now.
I have a friend who worked at Stripe unit last year. He recently warned me that things are not going well, and he has heard rumors and I should avoid interviewing there. So I think they had some idea that something is going on.
Re: Stripe laying off around 14% of workforce
#617I work for Stripe and got laid off this morning. Sucks because my manager was only told this morning, and didn't have a chance to talk about how well I was doing or take any part in the decision making. We'll at least I'll get a break. I worked nights and weekends all of October.
Best of luck to you, that's tough.
It shouldn't be the case that people can be laid off just like that - particularly if their work was obviously needed.
Re: Stripe laying off around 14% of workforce
#618Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please. Stripe is privately held so let's look at a market comp, SQ. SQ 2021 Revenue: $17B SQ 2021 cash and short term investments: $5.3B Stripe 2021 Revenue: $12B Similar businesses, operating in the same market, with the nearly the same number of employees (about 8000). Barring exceptional circumstances, we would expect their financial health to be roughly similar. You said it yourself: > the leaders have to... [de…
> They could afford to dip into cash and keep everyone on board but their investors are more concerned about propping up the valuation This an example of how bullshit jobs are created. Why keep people on a payroll if you have no use for them anymore?
Suddenly realizing that 14% of your employees are not necessary for your business seems like a sign that something is wrong...
Re: Stripe laying off around 14% of workforce
#619Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am honestly amused by this. There are so many denigrating words that have their origin in or deep connotations with intellectual disability, yet somehow “r-word” is the one that gets all the attention. Though, I must admit I’ve seen people going even further and claiming that “crazy” is an ableist slur. And I am not sure which is worse, being selective or being consistent but annoying.
"The origins of the latest epithet in vogue are harmless." The origin of the word is irrelevant. Words mean things and can be harmful, regardless of the origin of the word. The meaning and context of words can change over time, regardless of the origin of the word. Bringing Charles Darwin into the conversation does not help your point. "Is it worse to have some condition of your birth used as a casual insult -- a rem…
You know the euphemism treadmill right? The words moron and imbecile were once valid terms for mentally disabled, and offensive to use casually, but are no longer offensive in that way.
Conversely, people tried to introduce the term "special needs" to avoid the connotations of "retarded", and then "special" became an insult.
The word "lame" is also incredibly widely used and no longer considered offensive even though it's still a valid term for those who have difficulty walking.
I don't have a point, just find the whole thing very interesting. "retarded" is definitely in the grey area where I personally try to avoid using it, but it's still commonly used. Perhaps "crazy" and "insane" are next.
Re: Stripe laying off around 14% of workforce
#620I am suddenly seeing articles about multiple US tech companies doing layoffs / pausing hiring on HN as well, not sure why and how all this relates....Has global recession started???