It's so funny... I've had a list of potential new employers ever since I re-opened my linkedin profile to "semi-open for opportunities" a year ago or so, and over time, every single one of them has basically disqualified itself with horror stories. I'm probably not looking hard enough, as I guess I'm only hearing about the opportunities that are needing to advertise heavily due to being lousy places to work.
Databricks counts being laid off as “red flag”
51–60 of 201 posts
Re: Databricks counts being laid off as “red flag”
#52This is asinine, discriminatory and unfair. I'd even say it's borderline malicious. Glad they named and shamed. I would't do any business with this company, nor attempt to work for them. A RIF has nothing to do with a person's performance .. at least officially. One has to assume it was a business decision only, not performance based, although with a large reduction it seems improbable that the people left would be,…
For anyone like you (and me) who says being laid off doesn't mean bad performance you have someone else saying it's good that Meta, Twitter, etc. are cleaning house, getting rid of all the slackers. Those are the folks calling it a red flag later.
The thing, is we want to believe that a company makes careful decisions about whom to lay off. We know it doesn't quite work like that but as you said yourself there can be a bunch of reasons. And with that context you're still looking at the reality that the company didn't deem the laid off workers important enough to keep.
I don't agree with what happened to the candidate here and we are all at risk of being laid off after all, but at the same time we cannot just assume the companies didn't have reasons to select one person over the other. And being overpaid itself might be a red flag for some hiring managers.
What I mean is, we cannot have it both ways, saying RIFed doesn't mean anything while at the same time assuming that companies follow a rational decision process and don't just play roulette.
Re: Databricks counts being laid off as “red flag”
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Lying is not a solution Agreed. You should not lie in interviews. A common way of avoiding having to lie is registering your own consulting company after getting laid off. No resume gap! As far as if it fools recruiters, no idea. It's got to sometimes, right? I see it too often on LinkedIn for it to be useless.
That's just another way of lying. If it makes you feel better about it, then fine I guess.
It's lying but it's a lie that is backed up by your history when they search your previous jobs
Re: Databricks counts being laid off as “red flag”
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There's a missing bit of context here about what "laid off" actually means in this person's case. We are assuming it means a non-performance related reduction in force, but it may be something different. But that's basically the definition of a layoff; the elimination of roles from a company due to reasons unrelated to the performance of the laid off people (e.g. lack of work, economic conditions). If somebody lose…
if a company decided to reduce staff by X%, and they decide to factor in performance when deciding who to lay off…that’s still not being fired.
Legally that would be the same as being fired. There's quite a few stipulations for a company to conduct a legitimate and recognized layoff.
Re: Databricks counts being laid off as “red flag”
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There's a missing bit of context here about what "laid off" actually means in this person's case. We are assuming it means a non-performance related reduction in force, but it may be something different. But that's basically the definition of a layoff; the elimination of roles from a company due to reasons unrelated to the performance of the laid off people (e.g. lack of work, economic conditions). If somebody lose…
I am aware of and agree with this definition. But... One company I worked for had two rounds of layoffs - the first round got rid of exclusively low performers (they didn't announce it that way but it was clear) while the second cut across the board. If someone had that insight, they'd be right to consider someone cut in the first wave as a red flag. But more generally, I don't think people stick to this definition,…
I have never met a company that was able to reliably gauge performance. And would not put that against anyone unless they were intentionally fired and we're evasive about it.
Re: Databricks counts being laid off as “red flag”
#56I think their HR culture may be a little toxic. When I told them their offer was not enough, they got very irate. They said if I only care about money I’m not a good fit for their culture of builders, and that I should watch out because there are lots of lay offs happening. It all left me with a very poor impression of them.
I met Reynold a few years ago about a job and also withdrew because he frankly got too self-righteous and made me feel uncomfortable. Cloudera was a bit warmer but was missing a lot of productive energy. I think the founding Databricks team are just very analytical and system-oriented, even when it comes to people. It's reasonable to expect the early team to have adapted to people management by now, but some of the potential champions of that have left, and the product remains primarily B2B.
Re: Databricks counts being laid off as “red flag”
#57Fun fact: in some jurisdictions such as New York and DC, this is illegal. It's called "discrimination against the unemployed". Check the laws of your state, the state you would work in, and the state the company is headquartered in to see if this may apply to you.
While it's nice to know these laws exist, what would you really do with it? The company proved it has a terrible culture. Doesn't seem worth it to fight for a job with them.
I like to think that it’s not always a direct individual outcome that helps. With enough soft complaints the regulator might write a reminder letter to the given HR dept which could go over relevant law and warn about repercussions of breaking it. And that might be enough to straighten out some practices.
Re: Databricks counts being laid off as “red flag”
#58The _average_ quality of those who where laid off is indeed probably a bit lower than the average quality of those who weren't.
But there's so much variance within those groups! The very _worst_ way of using that information that is:
- Interview everyone; run them through the full assessment process
- Once you have a successful group through the process, nix anyone with this trait
Re: Databricks counts being laid off as “red flag”
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am aware of and agree with this definition. But... One company I worked for had two rounds of layoffs - the first round got rid of exclusively low performers (they didn't announce it that way but it was clear) while the second cut across the board. If someone had that insight, they'd be right to consider someone cut in the first wave as a red flag. But more generally, I don't think people stick to this definition,…
I have never met a company that was able to reliably gauge performance. And would not put that against anyone unless they were intentionally fired and we're evasive about it.
// I have never met a company that was able to reliably gauge performance
I have had the opposite experience. Every company I've worked for, the employee ranking matched my perception of that employee pretty well on average.
Re: Databricks counts being laid off as “red flag”
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
if a company decided to reduce staff by X%, and they decide to factor in performance when deciding who to lay off…that’s still not being fired.
Legally that would be the same as being fired. There's quite a few stipulations for a company to conduct a legitimate and recognized layoff.
What I've seen happen in practice is the company position it as a layoff in the way you describe, but the folks let go tend to skew weaker.