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

Apple avoids job cuts because it didn’t overhire like Google and Amazon

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 439 posts

Re: Apple avoids job cuts because it didn’t overhire like Google and Amazon

#191

Post by a4isms »

etempleton wrote: post #53
wand3r wrote: post #33

> Apple, meanwhile, was more cautious. Its headcount increased just 20% from 2020 to 2022 At Apples size this is still pretty huge. At least, I thought it was until I saw that Amazon, Meta and Salesforce basically DOUBLED in 2 years. If this data is correct isnt that insane? How can you effectively double orgs of this size over a 2 year period? Its not like a startup with 50 people or something. I guess I was out of…

Growing too fast is damaging to both culture and productivity. You have a bunch of people starting that are still learning. Depending on the job and the person it can take a full year to be fully competent in a job. Apple was smart to move slower. They are probably one of the best run companies in the world.

I use "Eternal September" for the cultural effect on businesses that suddenly gorge themselves on new hires that have no exposure to the existing culture or context. The negative effects are loosely parallel to what happens when a social medium breaks out of being a subculture and goes mainstream.

Re: Apple avoids job cuts because it didn’t overhire like Google and Amazon

#192

Post by giantg2 »

noodlesUK wrote: post #133
dylan604 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are probably the ones being let go. That has always been a concern to me about being laid off in one of these massive layoffs efforts. If it is pretty much understood that in these moves the companies are removing dead weight, does that stigma get attached to you as you search for a new job.

It’s pretty hard to be choosy at that scale. I don’t get the impression that these large scale layoffs were targeting individual low performers, but are rather slashing entire business units. (I might be mistaken, but that’s the impression I’ve got)

Yeah, from what others have said, entire teams are being cut.

Re: Apple avoids job cuts because it didn’t overhire like Google and Amazon

#193

Post by [deleted] »

lapcat wrote: post #184
shmatt wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This just means the letter will include the wording "last resort" and "we tried everything to avoid this"

This ignores the headline of the article, which is "it didn't overhire". Thus, not only is Cook downplaying the possibility of layoffs, but Apple clearly doesn't need to do them.

[deleted]

Re: Apple avoids job cuts because it didn’t overhire like Google and Amazon

#194

Post by flappyeagle »

Patrol8394 wrote: post #156

It all comes down to Apple being a very focused company. They know their customers, what they want and they have a much better business model. Steve Jobs once explained it by saying they say no to a lots of things even to those who seem on paper great ideas. All that to stay focus. On the other hand, Google is all over the places, they are very distracted and confident that they will always be the indisputable kind i…

At almost every place I've ever worked, there were about 10-20% of employees who were unproductive. Sometimes it's because they were bad hires, or they were just working on projects that added no value.

I was at a series B startup that did 15% layoffs during the first pandemic wave. The result: we moved faster, code quality went up, morale increased over time. Some layoffs are driven by necessity, and some are opportunistic ways for companies to retool and mass-fire low performers.

This applies at higher levels of abstractions too. When google did their layoffs, multiple entire unprofitable teams and business units were eliminated. It doesn't matter if "they could pay for it". They had an opportune excuse to remove some ugly looking lines from the balance sheet all at once and they took it.

It's impractical for them to try to differentiate high and low individual performers at that scale. No matter how talented you are, you were contributing to a loss-making part of the company.

Apple seems to have been better at not having useless teams and divisions. Tim Cook is a disciplined guy, so I'm not surprised.

Re: Apple avoids job cuts because it didn’t overhire like Google and Amazon

#195

Post by Gh0stRAT »

glomgril wrote: post #179
danudey wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ideally it takes a full year for them to realize that you're not competent, at which point you hit your 1 year cliff and can snag 25% of your options or RSUs before you get PIP'ed out.

If you're at Amazon you'll walk away with 5% after one year, and only 20% after two years.

True, but misleading. Amazon gives big cash bonuses to new hires in years 1 and 2 in order to compensate for the back-weighted vesting schedule.

Re: Apple avoids job cuts because it didn’t overhire like Google and Amazon

#196

Post by chaostheory »

dmitriid wrote: post #166
chaostheory wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> show flashy special effects that would never work this way in real life This is only true if you can’t see the future that’s right in front of your eyes. Also unless something will violate laws of physics, it’s not wise to say that never will happen or is impossible to achieve https://www.wired.co.uk/article/oblong-minority-report-john-... We also already have Quest 2 as a pretty good VR device that’s shipped, not…

> This is only true if you can’t see the future that’s right in front of your eyes. It really isn't in front of my eyes, and won't be for a long time. > No idea why it's here. And yes you are restricted by the laws of physics and human biology. > We also already have Quest 2 as a pretty good VR device that’s shipped VR is a) distinctly different from AR, b) requires bulky headsets, and c) borderline unusable for any…

> yes you are restricted by the laws of physics and human biology

Yeah, you didn’t cite any laws that restrict this future. You’re wrong.

Let’s also not be disingenuous. those “fantasy interfaces” are working prototypes and not just movie CGI. There are also real world products like NReal. You’re not familiar enough with the subject despite being confidently wrong

> VR is a) distinctly different from AR, b) requires bulky headsets, and c) borderline unusable for any extended periods of time

1. There is pass through AR which what Quest headsets and the new Apple headset will support

2. Bulky headsets are the past and present. That isn’t the future, or even the near future

Re: Apple avoids job cuts because it didn’t overhire like Google and Amazon

#197

Post by r00fus »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #150
r00fus wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me know when someone has solved the "glasshole" creep factor. Clearly Apple is the most capable in shifting consumer sentiment but that's a challenging hurdle.

I've personally solved it by striving to care less about what other people think. I realize that doesn't work for everyone in all circumstances, though.

The problem isn't your adoption of new tech (e.g. google glass) it's that your behavior using new tech engenders blowback from others (they call you a glasshole) and THEY won't adopt the new tech.

Adoption is a key metric that differentiates a successful product vs. failed product.

Re: Apple avoids job cuts because it didn’t overhire like Google and Amazon

#198

Post by roncesvalles »

EricHolden12 wrote: post #62

Companies over hired during the pandemic because they issued stock to new employees to artificially boost their share price.

Companies don't need to hire people to issue new stock. They can do it anytime.

People forget these days but the entire point of the stock market is to give companies a money-printing machine. More accurately, it's an on-demand way of obtaining investment by sucking up value from the people who hold your shares.

Re: Apple avoids job cuts because it didn’t overhire like Google and Amazon

#199

Post by krab »

renewiltord wrote: post #157
krab wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hiring many people and firing them shortly after isn't very productive use of human minds. Those people were doing probably something more valuable instead.

And now they can. It is good that people are being laid off. They can now go do the valuable thing. Perhaps Google's true target should have been 50% layoffs so that they can release people to go work on their valuable stuff instead of working at Google.

That's mostly Google's decision. :shrug:

Anyway, I see a difference between hiring and laying off vs. not hiring in the first place with regard to disruption in worker's lives.

Post reply on HN