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

491–500 of 596 posts

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#491

Post by stainforth »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #385
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…

> When you’re making CEO salary, no amount of salary reduction will have a day to day impact, but this seems strongly symbolic at least. If I remember correctly, Steve Jobs had a $1 salary. And a Learjet. A lot of these folks don't make most of their money from salary. If his main income is from stocks, then he may actually be doing fairly well.

The learjet flights were "unrealized flights"

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#492

Post by JohnBooty »

phtrivier wrote: post #434

Laymen question : do you know how the magic number of "12-15%" gets decided ? Either is just everyone copying each other to please their boards (reasonable hypothetical), or there is one investor that make the same demand everywhere, or there is some regulation behind it, or there is some math ? I mean, it seems like the stock price would go up too if they laid off 20 or 25, or maybe 50%, and maybe some bold CEO is g…

    I mean, it seems like the stock price would go 
    up too if they laid off 20
We laid off 20% on Jan 31st, and our stock price...

...or, uh, I should say their stock price, because I was one of the 20%...

...did go up.

If you lay off too many, it starts to look like panic and/or it starts to look like you were running your business in an clueless way, with tons of dead weight and/or bad hires.

10-20% seems "safe" to me. It doesn't spook investors too much. Generally, if you look at almost any team, at least 1 in 5 are not performing amazingly. IMO this happens even in well run companies and is often purely a fit issue and is not necessarily an indictment of either employer or employee. It also means you're not necessarily destroying any particular team

(Example: you have a talented front end engineer, but they've been pressed into more of a "full stack" role and they're forced to do a bunch of backend work that is far from their strengths. No, I'm not describing myself. Not a front end guy.)

This wave of 10-20% cuts feels like an opportunistic version of the notorious "stack ranking" that Microsoft used to do.

I'm not defending any of this. I'm not really criticizing it either. It's just my strong impression of what it is. I'm f'ing numb to this industry at this point, honestly.

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#493

Post by EMM_386 »

kerkeslager wrote: post #454
EMM_386 wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. I can't tell if all of this is due to the age of people who have joined the workforce over the last decade, when we were in a constant uphill swing. Markets go through cycles, boom and bust. We happen to be in part of the cycle where interest rates are rising, inflation is high, profi…

> 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…

> That's "You were used" with extra steps. Why are you trying to rebrand this?

Of course you were "used". You were used to get work done in exchange for a paycheck.

That's how work ... works. I am confused by the outrage ... did engineers think signing on to a company meant they were set for life? That once they were onboarded they were sheltered from future storms?

The tides turn, and right now the tide is going out. Eventually, this process will reverse and the cycle begins anew.

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#494

Post by dopeboy »

theusus wrote: post #110

I don't understand, Zoom for my perspective is everywhere today. What business issues are they facing?

Less a fundamental issue and more a receding of the wave post pandemic. I’m going to guess they assumed that growth would last and hired against it.

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#495

Post by [deleted] »

deathanatos wrote: post #351
password11 wrote: post #152

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.

Hopefully they're also sending a NACK email too. Having been through it, let me tell you that's a gut wrenching n minutes to wait, though.

[deleted]

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#496

Post by yellow_postit »

speby wrote: post #430
lkrubner wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Because of that, I am firing myself" A team does terrible for awhile -- should the coach be removed? A company does terrible -- should the CEO be removed? This is what accountability means. Just this year I was hired by a Board Of Directors, of a startup with 150 people, to do an evaluation of the technology and code, and I found epic levels of tech debt and irresponsible decision making. When I gave my report to th…

You answered your own question. Yes. Who removes a CEO? The Board. If the Board does their job (correctly), then they will make the right decision to release or retain the right CEO. If the Board fails to do its job? What, then? Yep, shareholders have to intervene. Which leads to what happens if the shareholders themselves don't figure out what to do or the right-decision to be made? Well, they lose a bunch of value…

The board likely signed off on the hiring plan. Layoffs are hard but as other commenters have pointed out are not inherently a sign the company is doing poorly. In many cases a board may choose to reward a ceo for identifying cuts and charting and executing a path forward.

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#497

Post by chrstphrknwtn »

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.

Workers get paid along the way, not sure that constitutes being "used". I think worker rights aren't great in the United States, but characterising US tech workers who are paid extremely well as having been used is a bit much.

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#498

Post by fijiaarone »

Here’s a free feature zoom could implement in only a few months with hundreds of workers — tell me which meeting I’m attending.

Here’s another which would be impossible for them to implement correctly — let me see my screen when I’m presenting and don’t cover it with stupid controls, or maybe if you can’t do that, let me see the useful controls too

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#499

Post by benatkin »

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…

No, to me this is much worse than doing nothing, and makes me dislike Zoom even more.

Doing this and saying nothing might have had a similar degree of sanctimoniousness. I guess I think that if he thought this was a good idea he should have waited a few days to do it quietly, instead of pretending to understand the struggles of the employees in his own personal financial life.

However, if it helps some employees process it maybe it's worth it even if it rubs some the wrong way, like it would me.

Re: Zoom lays off 15% of employees

#500

Post by fijiaarone »

speby wrote: post #390
vsareto wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably the best you can hope for in terms of fairness right now. You'll never see executives put themselves financially in the same situation as the lowest level people they are letting go. This is actually a pretty big step, but the move will need some benefit to the company for it to become more common-place. They might roll these bonuses into subsequent bonuses, but that may actually end up being a motiv…

Seriously? What 'fairness' exactly is it people want when companies do layoffs? "Hey, we are laying off 3,000 people. Because of that, I am firing myself and the company will no longer have a CEO and will have to find someone else, starting immediately. In addition, I plan to donate all of my life's savings and file for unemployment like everyone else and, if needed, live in my van down by the river. I hope this make…

If you have to lay off 3000 people because of your bad leadership, you should absolutely be fired too.

For the bad PR you’ve created, if for nothing else.

Post reply on HN