471–480 of 596 posts
- Comments about how this is a good thing and bravo to the CEO for actually taking accountability - Replies saying how it's never enough and the CEO should be fired for doing something as stupid as hiring people during an economic boom - Comments off ^^^ talking about how much net worth the CEO has based on stock that he hasn't liquidated, and how much he made off this temporary stock bump from cutting "cruft" - Comm…
You've forgot meta comment categorizing comments
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You go to work to earn a paycheck. I'm not sure how many people bought into the whole "we're a family" stuff, but obviously these are for-profit corporations and they are beholden only to their shareholders. That's "You were used" with extra steps. Why are you trying to rebrand this? > There was never the illusion otherwise, unless you truly believed that now that you're in, you're in. Just because people knew it w…
"You were used" implies you didn't get anything in return. But if you got paid , maybe you came out ahead on the deal?
It doesn't imply that you didn't get anything, it implies that you didn't get enough.
> But if you got paid, maybe you came out ahead on the deal?
Workers almost never come out ahead on the deal. Company sees 100% revenue growth (as a result of worker's labor), worker gets a 3% raise. Company sees 10% revenue loss, worker gets laid off. It's the same story every cycle: the people at the top reap benefits while the people at the bottom pay the losses.
It's only in the business echo chamber that anyone is even saying what you're saying. Everyone else knows that layoffs are bad for workers.
when first reading this i realized that i had just assumed that zoom had already done layoffs as they were one of the big profiteers of the pandemic.
the way they're handling this however gives me a lot of respect for the company.
Did Zoom file the required layoff pre-notice?
That's not really how it works when companies give severance in the US/ California. Pre-notice only really matters if you are letting people go with nothing.
In other words, when the WARN act applies I don't think it's sufficient to give 90 days of severance. Those employees must remain on the payroll during the notice period.
I think it's common to tell these laid-off employees "you're on the payroll but not expected to report to work during the next 90 days", so it's kinda a distinction without a difference, but it does or at least could have an impact on things like benefits, bonus payouts and vesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"You were used" implies you didn't get anything in return. But if you got paid , maybe you came out ahead on the deal?
> "You were used" implies you didn't get anything in return. It doesn't imply that you didn't get anything , it implies that you didn't get enough . > But if you got paid, maybe you came out ahead on the deal? Workers almost never come out ahead on the deal. Company sees 100% revenue growth (as a result of worker's labor), worker gets a 3% raise. Company sees 10% revenue loss, worker gets laid off. It's the same stor…
Of course layoffs are bad for workers.
I'm just taking the controversial position that on the other hand, jobs are good for workers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you are a US-based employee who is impacted, you will receive an email to your Zoom and personal inboxes in the next 30 minutes that reads [IMPACTED] Departing Zoom: What You Need to Know. This is the way to notify people of a layoff. Immediate binary yes/no. Although there is no great way to do it, this layoff seems pretty respectful and well done.
Are you kidding? Passing the message that you're CANNED in the SUBJECT of the email is now considered respectful ? No, it's robotic, and pathetic. They'll soon be writing these lovely messages to their employees, as well as you're fired emails with ChatGPT.
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…
Yeah, a lot of layoffs make a lot more sense when you re-evaluate the assumption that these CEOs are hiring people with the intent of keeping them indefinitely. For many, I'd bet this was the plan all along
Another important point is its not the case that all the hiring is LIFO. In fact we know that many old-time googlers were let go. I am sure many of the more recent hires have stuck around.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "You were used" implies you didn't get anything in return. It doesn't imply that you didn't get anything , it implies that you didn't get enough . > But if you got paid, maybe you came out ahead on the deal? Workers almost never come out ahead on the deal. Company sees 100% revenue growth (as a result of worker's labor), worker gets a 3% raise. Company sees 10% revenue loss, worker gets laid off. It's the same stor…
If the company saw 10% revenue loss, and the employee got 2 years' pay, then I would argue the employee definitely came out with the better end of that deal. Of course layoffs are bad for workers. I'm just taking the controversial position that on the other hand, jobs are good for workers .
Is there any case where you'd ever admit that corporations can harm workers, or is it really just impossible for corporations to do any harm within your worldview?
Facebook had $40.7 billion cash on hand in 2022[1] and laid off 11,000 workers in the same year[2]. That's literally $3.7 million cash on hand per worker laid off, or $370K/year over the next 10 years, if the recession lasts that long. Meta could definitely weather this recession without laying off these workers.
But let me guess, they don't have any responsibility to workers. The only people companies are responsible to are shareholders, amirite? It doesn't matter who gets harmed, we just have to follow these arbitrary rules!
[1] https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/META/meta-platform... [2] https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/09/tech/meta-facebook-layoffs/in...