Live data from Hacker News

Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs

businessinsider.com

51–60 of 386 posts

Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs

#51
post #20

The goal of the CEO of a publicly traded company is to make the shareholders money. As much money as possible. If laying people off is the best way to do that, they'll do it. Blaming the CEO for doing the job they were hired to do seems short-sighted. Blame the broken system that incentivizes this, that makes doing it profitable. And then, let's change the system.

If their job is to make money for the shareholders, and quarterly reports show that they are either making less money, or incurring in losses, then they aren't doing their job. They laid off people who had little to zero influence in defining the company mission, trying to cut spending. This suggests that the C-suite over-spent. > Blaming the CEO for doing the job they were hired to do seems short-sighted. Blame the…

> quarterly reports show that they are either making less money, or incurring in losses, then they aren't doing their job

That’s a bad take. Companies can incur losses while the ceos do their jobs. Short term profitability and long term growth are both ceo responsibilities. If you take decisions to boost short term numbers to gut the company’s health over a longer term you should be fired. The exact myopic view led to destruction of airline and car rental companies stock in the last decade. Those ceos were not making money for the shareholders beyond the few quarters they “made money”.

Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs

#55
post #20

The goal of the CEO of a publicly traded company is to make the shareholders money. As much money as possible. If laying people off is the best way to do that, they'll do it. Blaming the CEO for doing the job they were hired to do seems short-sighted. Blame the broken system that incentivizes this, that makes doing it profitable. And then, let's change the system.

If their job is to make money for the shareholders, and quarterly reports show that they are either making less money, or incurring in losses, then they aren't doing their job. They laid off people who had little to zero influence in defining the company mission, trying to cut spending. This suggests that the C-suite over-spent. > Blaming the CEO for doing the job they were hired to do seems short-sighted. Blame the…

> A CEO would not need to lay off people if their long term plans worked accordingly, which means that they suck at their job.

So any CEO who is not a psychic will most likely end up sucking at their job.

Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs

#56
post #39

The only solution is to form a guild for software engineers. Control access to the guild through credentials and other means. Provide mentorship and apprenticeship opportunities through the guild. Allow the guild to negotiate rates and working conditions with the industry. If actors can do it, why can't we? If you want to level the playing field with tech CEOs, that's the way to do it.

Why call it something weird? You're talking about a union.

Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs

#57
Right now, this posting links to…

https://www.businessinsider.com/tech-ceo-accountable-layoffs...

… which is kindof a 'weekly roundup' article. It refers to the actual article, which is at…

https://www.businessinsider.com/fire-blame-ceo-tech-employee...

Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs

#60
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The goal of the CEO of a publicly traded company is to make the shareholders money. As much money as possible. This is a poor take. The function of the CEO of a publicly traded company is to execute on major objectives of the firm. This might be optimizing for max profit, but it might not, depending on what your majority shareholders communicate to the board and management (as well as how they vote their shares). A…

I'd like to see a few recent examples of CEOs making decisions for the future health of the company that knowingly lower the stock price for more than 2Q.

Zuckerberg did this. He correctly or incorrectly believes, Metaverse to be the future and so he invested in it knowing that short term profit may fall because of this.
Post reply on HN