61–68 of 68 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
You’re on an American website, and talking with people who are statistically likely to be American. So yes.
I can well imagine there are lots of upset people having lost their jobs. However it never seems to be a priority or even on radar for jobseekers to consider how a a company handles layoffs or handled layoffs in the past as a proxy for their own treatment should that time come again. I wonder if this is partially because jobs seekers have over optimized for salary or total comp relative to other things like job secur…
Well, there is a kind of employer that will always have the top spot for layoff resistance -- the government. Nonprofits as well are generally similar.
Of course, once the initial funding/runway runs out, it can be quiet a different story :-P
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At my last medium sized company there were at least a half dozen branches of “the budget”, with employees and sales people being measured against the most aggressive budget, and several levels of management adding their own buffers, and finally the board which was working off the most conservative/pessimistic revenue and profit forecasts. No idea if this is normal or not.
It is normal because most labor sellers are not able or willing to sell their labor at a higher price to a different buyer. All that nonsense about pools and targets and budgets is just a polite way of the buyer saying “we are betting you will not quit for x number”. As a labor seller, you should always just think of employers as buyers, and negotiate the way you would in any transaction. If you think you can get mor…
In order to sell at a high price, someone else must be buying...
This market maker analogy really isn't a win.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is normal because most labor sellers are not able or willing to sell their labor at a higher price to a different buyer. All that nonsense about pools and targets and budgets is just a polite way of the buyer saying “we are betting you will not quit for x number”. As a labor seller, you should always just think of employers as buyers, and negotiate the way you would in any transaction. If you think you can get mor…
>It is normal because most labor sellers are not able or willing to sell their labor at a higher price to a different buyer. In order to sell at a high price, someone else must be buying... This market maker analogy really isn't a win.
And it is not a market maker analogy, it has nothing to do with market making.
The point is, the buyer dictating price is “normal” because sellers often are not in a position to turn down the offer, whether it be due to them not having an option or not being willing to take a risk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It stings a little, but is ultimately not that bad if you have a very healthy emergency fund. It’s generally much cheaper than housing.
How much would it be?
In the UK the redundancy lists were often based on completely inaccurate "employee job codes". These were seemingly set when you joined the company and there was no process to review or update your code. At one stage I was on the redunancy list despite working in a 'Strategic' area. I only managed to dodge it after my Exec/Partner lobbied for someone to see sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
again, then Americans wouldnt care about SAP lay offs which should be a bigger thing in Germany. Please accept different perspectives.
Yes, then please accept the different perspective of people concerned about losing their health insurance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So I thought Hackernews is an international website where everybody assume we are spread across the globe. Looks like some people are very narrow minded.
I'd argue it's the low empathy, low effort 'America problem' comment spawning responses worthy of it versus narrow mindedness.