Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff • Hacker News Board

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#161

Post by lmarcos » Thu, Feb 09, 2023, 3:15 PM UTC

msm_ wrote: post #98

softwaredoug wrote: post #63

Listened to a great podcast about layoffs yesterday ( https://hbr.org/podcast/2023/02/why-many-companies-get-layof... ) The takeaway is that layoffs are extremely trust destroying for employees NOT laid off, and in the end not clear they're a financial net positive. Both with direct and indirect costs (lack of engagement from employees, etc).

My issue with analyses like this is they argue that layoffs are a bad idea and it's just companies shooting themselves in a foot. That's what people want to hear, so it gets a lot of clicks and citations. But, this also means that all the big companies (and that's a lot of them) that just announced layoffs made a obviously bad move. Are they all stupid? I find it hard to believe. It's more plausible, that yeah, layof…

These companies laying off people are doing so because they made a mistake to begin with (over hiring). So, yeah, if you make one mistake, you can make another.

And no: not all tech companies have over hired during the pandemic and they are not firing people these days. No one talks about them because that doesn't sell.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#162

Post by dzonga » Thu, Feb 09, 2023, 3:15 PM UTC

it's always the magic number between 5~7%.

which shows these companies are following the herd.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#163

Post by mattl » Thu, Feb 09, 2023, 3:15 PM UTC

trombonechamp wrote: post #136

mattl wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing to stop them hiring for that particular role if needed... also hi!

Is this the mattl I think it is? If so, hi!

Hey Max! You can get me on https://mat.tl or @mattl@mat.tl for Mastodon

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#164

Post by time_to_smile » Thu, Feb 09, 2023, 3:16 PM UTC

sqldba wrote: post #110

It's weird because I've seen job posts for them running for 6 months now and still not be filled. Are they running job ads but not hiring?

Companies generally give as little evidence as possible of layoffs before they happen. Morale and productivity take a huge hit as soon as employees start to realize what's coming.

If you keep an eye open on who's hiring on linkedin you'll see a surprising number of companies posting new positions will have layoffs the next week.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#165

Post by sonjaqql » Thu, Feb 09, 2023, 3:17 PM UTC

tebruno99 wrote: post #93

If they would lower their prices to be competitive they’d get a lot more cash. We tried to switch to Gitlab and at every turn they acted like We just weren’t worth the $$. Seems they want nothing but big enterprise accounts and they push everyone else to free

This rings so true. A best friend ran her business through GitLab for years. She was a subscriber for a team of 3-5 people, but recent pricing and plan changes [1] caused her to switch back to GitHub.

She's got a small team on GitHub and has all of the critical features for less than a single seat at GitLab now.

[1]: https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/01/26/new-gitlab-product-...

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#166

Post by UtopiaPunk » Thu, Feb 09, 2023, 3:17 PM UTC

scient wrote: post #68

dboreham wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No because some of the effect is to instill fear.

[flagged]

Workers are workers. Even the most highly paid workers have more in common with the homeless than they do with capitalist class. Get laid off, maybe have a large medical bill, and then any worker could find themself desparate for just a roof over their head. So yeah, it sucks when these huge layoffs are happening, it sucks lot. The best thing that could come from this is for tech workers to realize how precarious their lives are and start standing in solidarity with other tech workers and workers generally. Don't try to drive a wedge between tech workers and other workers.

The working class and employing class have nothing in common.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#167

Post by nordsieck » Thu, Feb 09, 2023, 3:17 PM UTC

whatever1 wrote: post #151

softwaredoug wrote: post #63

Listened to a great podcast about layoffs yesterday ( https://hbr.org/podcast/2023/02/why-many-companies-get-layof... ) The takeaway is that layoffs are extremely trust destroying for employees NOT laid off, and in the end not clear they're a financial net positive. Both with direct and indirect costs (lack of engagement from employees, etc).

It takes long time for the layoff effects to hit the company. The main effect is that you lose the trust of the top performers. These will be the in the lookout for new opportunities the day after the layoffs are done. If you cut 10%, expect 10% from the top to flee within a couple of years. The second effect is related to the fact that companies usually target older people with expensive jobs. In an a big org these…

> The main effect is that you lose the trust of the top performers. These will be the in the lookout for new opportunities the day after the layoffs are done. If you cut 10%, expect 10% from the top to flee within a couple of years.

I don't know, but I imagine that there's a pretty substantial difference between an isolated layoff and an industry wide layoff. Maybe it hits differently when you get to see the sausage made.

Where is a top performer at Google going to go? I'm sure there's some companies out there that aren't doing layoffs right now, but most of those probably can't offer FAANG/MANGA salaries.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#168

Post by xyzelement » Thu, Feb 09, 2023, 3:19 PM UTC

pclmulqdq wrote: post #160

whatever1 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes long time for the layoff effects to hit the company. The main effect is that you lose the trust of the top performers. These will be the in the lookout for new opportunities the day after the layoffs are done. If you cut 10%, expect 10% from the top to flee within a couple of years. The second effect is related to the fact that companies usually target older people with expensive jobs. In an a big org these…

I think this is the logic that can make a company like Citadel, which fires 10% of their staff per year, work out well. If you have no expectation of job safety, it attracts a certain kind of person, but there's also no love lost if a layoff round is a little bigger than normal.

Exactly. I worked at a Citadel like fund and that's the vibe. The calculus was like this - I'd rather risk being fired than work in a place where low performers are cozy.

The reality is that working at a place like that or a FAANG for just a few years sets you up for a great career no matter what happens. So even if you get fired after a few years you are still better off.

It's good to have coworkers who can think rationally and make decisions this way, too. It's a virtuous cycle.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#169

Post by djkivi » Thu, Feb 09, 2023, 3:19 PM UTC

whatever1 wrote: post #151

softwaredoug wrote: post #63

Listened to a great podcast about layoffs yesterday ( https://hbr.org/podcast/2023/02/why-many-companies-get-layof... ) The takeaway is that layoffs are extremely trust destroying for employees NOT laid off, and in the end not clear they're a financial net positive. Both with direct and indirect costs (lack of engagement from employees, etc).

It takes long time for the layoff effects to hit the company. The main effect is that you lose the trust of the top performers. These will be the in the lookout for new opportunities the day after the layoffs are done. If you cut 10%, expect 10% from the top to flee within a couple of years. The second effect is related to the fact that companies usually target older people with expensive jobs. In an a big org these…

> The only way you can safely pull off layoffs is if you ensure that anything you do in the company requires the experience of a boot camp. That means that everyone is fungible and you can easily swap them.

This is an interesting way to think of the Leetcode style interview. If you don't require any particular experience and you have built your company's systems in a way that any "competent" developer can join and be effective, layoffs may not be such a big problem.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#170

Post by jkukul » Thu, Feb 09, 2023, 3:19 PM UTC

brandall10 wrote: post #123

jkukul wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are several reasons to do it this way: - Effective number will be higher because some employees will be disgruntled because of the layoff event and will leave on their own. It's usually estimated that the effective number is twice as high - By doing a layoff you can quickly get rid of people who are overpaid. The attrition would take much longer. And with the regular performance review process you can o…

Addressing point by point: - Why is this beneficial? The disgruntled will be the high performers. In no shape or form is this beneficial for culture. - Assuming you mean average performers who are paid well, ie. well tenured? Considering these types harness significant domain knowledge it would be a strategic mistake to let them go in any meaningful number. The focus on smaller cuts tends to be low performers or rece…

1. I actually also think it's not beneficial. However, company leaders must realise of this side-effect yet it doesn't stop them from lay-offs. I just wanted to point out a difference vs regular attrition, since this was the question asked by OP.

2. I could also be people hired recently, it is often the case that they're paid more than their peers on the same level.

3. Maybe re-assigning people from a dismantled team doesn't make sense because these people will be upset about their former team being dissolved and thus spread the negative energy to other teams?

4. I'm glad we agree :)