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

Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

about.gitlab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 622 posts

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#581

Post by sokoloff »

munificent wrote: post #504
WalterBright wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you cut 10%, expect 10% from the top to flee within a couple of years. If the company was laying off the deadwood and the quiet quitters, the top performers know who they are, and are not concerned about being laid off themselves. Top performers don't particularly care to work with deadwood and quiet quitters, either.

> If the company was laying off the deadwood and the quiet quitters That's a big if, though. Executives doing layoffs also tend to do them quickly and plan them in secret in order to reduce the chance leaks. That means they are deciding who to cut with very limited time and information. They make lots of mistakes. Both times I've been through large layoffs, I saw skilled respected peers get the axe while deadwood did…

As someone sometimes in that position, if I can get 85-90% accuracy (in both directions), I think that’s about the best I can possibly do in a 500-ish person organization.

I hate the false positive (including a good performer incorrectly beyond that required by the depth of layoff) more than anything else for its deep unfairness to the individual, the team, and the company.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#582

Post by sokoloff »

bastardoperator wrote: post #503
andsoitis wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Between 2020-2022 I literally conducted over 200 interviews for my previous employer. it sounds like you knew at the time that it was a mistake to hire this much and you were part of the interview processes. did you ever speak up, tried to make a case that it is the wrong move?

I might think this way if this was my first rodeo. When executives allocate money for hiring I assume they've put some thought into it with data outside my immediate view. You think I should be questioning executives? Most of us are out here just trying to survive and making C titles look bad in public is how you get fired immediately.

There’s a middle ground between saying nothing and making them look bad in public. Talk privately to your director/VP. Ask questions. You don’t even have to come right and say you think they’re wrong, but showing interest in the direction and financial health of t the company is unlikely to hurt you in any way.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#583

Post by waboremo »

FollowingTheDao wrote: post #189
waboremo wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not purely about the recession. If it was, they would halt hiring, keep talent, trim executive bonuses, and be precise about where dead weight exists. Not 5%+ layoffs of major teams and roles. You see other industries, they're laying people off sure, but we're not talking 5%+. They're doing the above, being more precise about their spending. Like Blackrock, huge losses, and still "only" let go of 500/16000, ~3%.…

Well, I am glad top see so many people deluded and thinking we are not in a recession. The only reason it doe snot look like a recession yet is because inflation is still higher then the Fed Rate. This is why the Industrials are not layoff as many people yet. > You will not see tech companies balloon to the same number of employees ever again I remember people sating this in 1999. > both of those reasons are amplifie…

>thinking we are not in a recession

Nowhere was that stated. Hopefully you understand that both we are in a recession, and you are being misled as to why these layoffs are happening are both true. As stated, if it was purely because of the recession, the likes of Blackrock would also be hitting 5%+ layoff numbers.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#584

Post by CharlieDigital »

mikepurvis wrote: post #205
CharlieDigital wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why React is so popular; not because it is inherently good or performance or has great DX but because of how easy it is to swap one so-so React dev for another so-so React dev.

Cynically, aren’t corporate blub languages like Java and Go kind of built on the same notion? That is, they intentionally limit the amount of complexity possible so that there is a low ceiling for mastery and workers are interchangeable.

The bar for React and Java are very different.

Before you mention that one is a UI library and the other is a programming language: that's my point.

There are a lot of FE devs that work backwards from React to JS/TS.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#585

Post by anothernewdude »

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).

I think it's a brinksmanship game. The company that does the least amount of layoffs and survives will be in the better condition coming out of the recession.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#586

Post by somsak2 »

SergeAx wrote: post #555
blagie wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because low-performers are nearly impossible to identify, at least from a CEO level. There are two things one can be doing in a job: 1) Their job 2) Signalling to everyone around how much they're doing, and how hard it is Universally, as you shift from camp 1 to camp 2, your job security goes up. There is no such thing as perfect transparency, and especially in careers like programming, it's hard to estimate how hard…

Every IC has their direct manager: team lead or something like that. Every decent manager knows who is underperforming in their team and secretly dreams about firing the slacker and hiring someone better instead, but rarely has such freedom. Now, the layoff is suddenly breaking. It's a no-brainer to jump the train and finally make it for the sake of the entire team.

I really doubt this. Unless I'm working pretty directly with someone (that is, on the same specific project), it's hard for me to know how much they're really contributing. On my team of 8, I really only know how hard 2 or 3 of my teammates work.

I have doubts that a manager would be able to do this that much better.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#587

Post by utrack »

zopa wrote: post #569
utrack wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd call it a complex system. It's entirely possible to have a component in a system that may disrupt the whole system in a whole new, unpredictable way. Just like some sort of asymptomatic tumor which breaks the whole body once it metastasizes.

Yes, and as I don’t want metaphorical chemotherapy for the country I’d prefer we chose a different metaphor. An analogy shouldn’t just be some strained parallels, it should lead us in useful and not destructive directions.

Oh, fair enough. Something surgical would be best :)

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#588

Post by mostertoaster »

lame-robot-hoax wrote: post #382
mostertoaster wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “good jobs report” is just smoke and mirrors to have something positive to say at the state of the union. Changing how you measure the number of jobs so it looks better is just par for the course for politicians. Using the old measure that 400k over the 100k expected is 20k less than expected.

What? When did the Biden administration change the methodology behind measuring unemployment?

Maybe they didn’t. Still smoke and mirrors though, we “gained” 500k jobs, even though payrolls would show a decrease in 2.5m. But it was expected we would lose 3m seasonal jobs. So voila! It’s like when the government says we saved 50 billion in spending this year because we were planning on increasing spending by 150 billion, but only increased it by 100 billion instead.

I’m not saying Biden is only one that does this, but the economy sucks, and those think the spin put out at the state union means otherwise, are like those who admire the naked emperors clothes.

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#589

Post by bastardoperator »

sokoloff wrote: post #582
bastardoperator wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might think this way if this was my first rodeo. When executives allocate money for hiring I assume they've put some thought into it with data outside my immediate view. You think I should be questioning executives? Most of us are out here just trying to survive and making C titles look bad in public is how you get fired immediately.

There’s a middle ground between saying nothing and making them look bad in public. Talk privately to your director/VP. Ask questions. You don’t even have to come right and say you think they’re wrong, but showing interest in the direction and financial health of t the company is unlikely to hurt you in any way.

Nope, I expect the people making these decisions who are responsible (and paid extremely well) for the financial health of the company to be doing an exhaustive due diligence when it comes to budget. The only real question is do any of these executives take responsibility for their actions. That question has ultimately been answered over the past couple of weeks so why bother asking...

Re: Gitlab to lay off 7% of staff

#590

Post by SergeAx »

somsak2 wrote: post #586
SergeAx wrote: post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every IC has their direct manager: team lead or something like that. Every decent manager knows who is underperforming in their team and secretly dreams about firing the slacker and hiring someone better instead, but rarely has such freedom. Now, the layoff is suddenly breaking. It's a no-brainer to jump the train and finally make it for the sake of the entire team.

I really doubt this. Unless I'm working pretty directly with someone (that is, on the same specific project), it's hard for me to know how much they're really contributing. On my team of 8, I really only know how hard 2 or 3 of my teammates work. I have doubts that a manager would be able to do this that much better.

Knowing performance of their team members is a manager's primary responsibility. Without it manager cannot plan anything and execute anything on time.
Post reply on HN