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

Zoom lays off 15% of employees

blog.zoom.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 596 posts

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#261

Post by ShakataGaNai »

haswell wrote: post #8

> As the CEO and founder of Zoom, I am accountable for these mistakes and the actions we take today– and I want to show accountability not just in words but in my own actions. To that end, I am reducing my salary for the coming fiscal year by 98% and foregoing my FY23 corporate bonus. Members of my executive leadership team will reduce their base salaries by 20% for the coming fiscal year while also forfeiting their…

Didn't look super deeply, but from an SEC filing dated 2018 - he was making a base pay of $300k/year. Some research online indicated his most recent bonuses were nearly the million mark.

So he goes from making over $1mil USD to $6,000/year. If the above is correct.

The salary alone should be enough to keep a couple people around. Yes, that doesn't make a big dent in ~1300 people laid off. But I imagine for those being laid off it's slightly less shitty (still super shitty) knowing that the CEO isn't still making 7 or 8 figures, like at most companies.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1585521/000119312519...

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#262

Post by JohnFen »

ketralnis wrote: post #31
MuffinFlavored wrote: post #5

> We have made the tough but necessary decision to reduce our team by approximately 15% and say goodbye to around 1,300 hardworking, talented colleagues. https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/ZM/zoom-video-comm... Zoom Video Communications total number of employees in 2022 was 6,787, a 53.48% increase from 2021. Zoom Video Communications total number of employees in 2021 was 4,422, a 74.64% increase from 2020. Zo…

> Did they really think COVID lifestyle was going to stay forever and their business would be gangbusters forever? It's easy to feel superior with hindsight, but possibly, yeah. Maybe it's not the right bet but it's not totally crazy to think that companies shifting to working from home might continue to work from home after trying it out. I can certainly think of some "they should have known" examples but this isn't…

At the very least, it was (or should have been) very clear to everybody that the future was uncertain. Permanently hiring people is a thing you do when you're certain.

Why did they not hire on time-limited contracts until they could be more sure of how things would shake out? If it turned out that the growth was permanent, you offer permanent jobs to the contractors. If it turned out it was temporary, you haven't made a promise to anyone that you could keep.

Either way, nobody gets burned.

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#263

Post by MuffinFlavored »

heleninboodler wrote: post #251
frankc wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The average person has more business sense than the CEO of Zoom and its entire board of executives who allowed rampant hiring because I could've guessed during COVID, despite the surge in demand given all of the work-from-home during lockdowns, my company most likely won't grow forever, therefore I won't triple my staff over the next 3 years and then need to just end up laying them off" I don't mean this to be snark…

I think there's a valid discussion to be had about whether we as an industry should expect massive hiring binges to be temporary and necessarily followed years later by layoffs, but these weren't billed as temporary jobs, so I think some shame is warranted. People probably relocated for these jobs, expecting them to be stable. I don't really want to become complacent to working in an industry where major players just…

> I think there's a valid discussion to be had about whether we as an industry should expect massive hiring binges to be temporary and necessarily followed years later by layoffs

Devil's advocate but at the end of the day, if you're an engineer and Zoom wants to offer you a low-six figure job ($100k-$300k/yr total comp I'm sure is within the normal range for most people), as an employee are you "grateful" and just shut up and take it and don't think twice from the perspective of, who cares if I get laid off in 18 months?

Like the company doesn't owe it to you to keep you employed, so the question becomes, do they owe it to you to at least give you a heads up that your full time job isn't really that permanent? No company really gives any salaried employee any guarantee like that. Who are we as employees to say "hey, I think I deserved more communication in your intentions with me/my job"?

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#264

Post by lazide »

orangesite wrote: post #229
lazide wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn’t taking ownership, that’s falling on your sword. There is a difference.

Falling on your sword is literally exactly what accountability used to be. …and the stakes are even higher today if you count the number of people impacted by poor decisions.

Cite?

Accountability means (from every definition I’ve found!) taking responsibility for one’s actions and their consequences.

Falling on one’s sword has, from what I’ve always read, has been portrayed as someone accepting too much responsibility, to the point they actually avoid dealing with the consequences of their actions and make the situation worse overall by killing themselves.

After all, no need to actually work hard making amends or doing better if you’re dead, eh?

And it can even make the person doing it somewhat of a martyr, even if they created the whole situation to begin with, as it can make it look like those calling for it or pushing for retribution were actually just looking for a scapegoat and the dead one is actually a victim.

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#265

Post by s1artibartfast »

JohnFen wrote: post #237
dahfizz wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this position. You imply that any layoff is a fundamental and serious mistake. Zoom's revenue grew like 10X over the past two years. They had a legitimate need to hire and grow the business, and now the market has corrected and they don't need as many employees. The hiring and firing decisions are exactly what I would expect from someone optimizing solely for the well-being of the company. It sucks…

I think it does mean that the CEO did a bad job. The growth over the last two years was clearly going to be a temporary blip. Hiring theoretically permanent employees in response is simply bad judgement. There are plenty of companies that exist in very cyclic industries who show the right way to handle this sort of thing. It's not like it's all a big mystery.

I think this is the key opinion in a nutshell. Some people see layoffs as bad management and other people simply don't

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#266

Post by OrvalWintermute »

chazeon wrote: post #56
MuffinFlavored wrote: post #5

> We have made the tough but necessary decision to reduce our team by approximately 15% and say goodbye to around 1,300 hardworking, talented colleagues. https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/ZM/zoom-video-comm... Zoom Video Communications total number of employees in 2022 was 6,787, a 53.48% increase from 2021. Zoom Video Communications total number of employees in 2021 was 4,422, a 74.64% increase from 2020. Zo…

Speaking from inside Academia, Zoom remains an important part of communication. We never used Zoom or any form of video chat before COVID, but even after COVID, Zoom is here to stay now. We meet in Zoom because it has unmatched quality and stability for video-conferencing / screen sharing compared to Skype etc. Office hour have Zoom sessions, etc.

Teams & Meet are improving rapidly; I can't help but ask why when it comes to Zoom these days.

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#267

Post by creato »

bell-cot wrote: post #158
credit_guy wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Goalpost moving. The people who complain that CEO's don't show any accountability, will then complain that whatever consequences the CEO's face (or self impose) are insignificant. Would you like this guy to commit hara-kiri?

How about a few CEO's getting fired for cause by their Boards, because their "I just do whatever the cooler kids are doing" hiring/firing binges show that they really aren't competent to run a company?

In the case of zoom, they had an explosion in users and demand due to their product being a good solution to some of the problems imposed by the pandemic. What is your suggestion? Companies hire when they have a lot of demand, the fire when they don’t. Just like basically any other organism’s response to its situation.

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#268

Post by MrGilbert »

Maybe it’s just me, but nowadays I'm reluctant of the "We are a big family" shenanigans. If I read "Zoomies", I'm pretty sure that won't help the people that are being laid off today.

You aren’t family, you are workers.

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#269

Post by BurningFrog »

madamelic wrote: post #86

This sucks but something like COVID should normalize the idea in the minds of workers that all workers are disposable regardless of education or skill. If you don't own 51% of the company, you are disposable. Zoom had a use for you during COVID, now they don't: bye-bye. You were used, they got what they needed and now it is time to go. That's how workers are treated and people should understand that. You are not Geor…

> You were used, they got what they needed and now it is time to go.

Both sides got what they needed. The company got work done, and the employee got paid.

Calling either side "used" makes no sense to me. Employment is always a temporary relationship that can be ended by either side at will.

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#270

Post by dahfizz »

JohnFen wrote: post #237
dahfizz wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this position. You imply that any layoff is a fundamental and serious mistake. Zoom's revenue grew like 10X over the past two years. They had a legitimate need to hire and grow the business, and now the market has corrected and they don't need as many employees. The hiring and firing decisions are exactly what I would expect from someone optimizing solely for the well-being of the company. It sucks…

I think it does mean that the CEO did a bad job. The growth over the last two years was clearly going to be a temporary blip. Hiring theoretically permanent employees in response is simply bad judgement. There are plenty of companies that exist in very cyclic industries who show the right way to handle this sort of thing. It's not like it's all a big mystery.

> Hiring theoretically permanent employees in response is simply bad judgement.

This is not self-evident. Hiring the salaried employees over 2+ years could very well be cheaper than contractors.

If they had under-hired during to boom, then we would not have layoff today but the company would not have grown as much. The incentives are set to hire people when you need them and fire them when you don't anymore. Layoffs are not expensive or damaging to the company; they don't have any reason to avoid them. Zoom's stock went up in response to the firing.

Post reply on HN