Amazon to Lay Off over 17,000 Workers, More Than First Planned

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 1:15 AM UTC

mjr00 wrote: post #43

discodave wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like Amazon. Back in the day they managed to avoid 'layoffs' by transferring thousands of people from Fire Phone -> Alexa. They somehow avoided layoffs from shutting down Prime Air (drones, not 767s), even though that had a lot of employees. They're pretty good at getting people to leave without doing 'layoffs'. Heck, if you believe that they've always had 5-10% 'unregretted attrition' targets, which I do, and…

> Heck, if you believe that they've always had 5-10% 'unregretted attrition' targets, which I do, and apply it to the whole company, that's 50-100k employees per year! This came up last time the Amazon layoffs were on HN, but: the URA target (which was 2-6% when I was there) is for people , not positions . That is, the intent is that departments are continually removing their worst performers, but replacing those peo…

Post by gwright » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 1:16 AM UTC

asdff wrote: post #59

lcw wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general layoffs especially when they are proactive, which in this case they seem to be, show investors that the company is being fiscally responsible. This isn't an indication that Amazon is going to increase profitability it's a sign to investors that they are taking in recession indicators and adapting accordingly. It doesn't seem malicious it seems perfectly reasonable and sane. Of course it's Amazon so there i…

I don't understand how its rational unless you assume staff have negative value. They don't, they have positive value, nothing gets done without staff. More staff means you output more work and make more money. Staff should be the last thing to cut.

Post by WalterBright » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 1:18 AM UTC

asdff wrote: post #59

lcw wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general layoffs especially when they are proactive, which in this case they seem to be, show investors that the company is being fiscally responsible. This isn't an indication that Amazon is going to increase profitability it's a sign to investors that they are taking in recession indicators and adapting accordingly. It doesn't seem malicious it seems perfectly reasonable and sane. Of course it's Amazon so there i…

I don't understand how its rational unless you assume staff have negative value. They don't, they have positive value, nothing gets done without staff. More staff means you output more work and make more money. Staff should be the last thing to cut.

Post by zmgsabst » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 1:18 AM UTC

laidoffamazon wrote: post #56

zmgsabst wrote: post #51

[flagged]

I guess this is a new target for the anti-woke axe grinding - corporate CFO's. Never thought I'd see it honestly. I think it's an interesting synthesis of the corporate-skeptical populist ideology with the non-white skeptical racialist ideology, so I guess we should be expecting far more of this in the next two years. Thankfully, I think most people this is just kinda weird culture war BS.

Post by WalterBright » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 1:19 AM UTC

bdcravens wrote: post #38

raziel2701 wrote: post #13

It's crazy that AMZN announces this and the stock goes up in after hours trading. People are losing their livelihoods yet rich people only care about the potential higher profits. This is very disconnected from reality, amzn needs consumers to buy their products. If layoffs keep piling up higher and deeper something is going to break and hello recession!

How else would you value a stock? It's fractional ownership in a company; bottom line matters. Also, many people who aren't "rich" own stocks.