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

Maersk to cut 10k jobs as shipping demand drops

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 176 posts

Re: Maersk to cut 10k jobs as shipping demand drops

#31

Post by tyingq »

boeingUH60 wrote: post #25
salmonlogs wrote: post #6

> Danish shipping giant Maersk has posted earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) of $30.9bn for the full year ended 31 December 2022, a 57% surge from $19.6bn in 2021. > This is said to be the firm’s best-ever annual result. https://www.ship-technology.com/news/maersk-logs-record-prof... Really sad to see these companies make enormous record beating profits then months later do mass layoffs just to maintain better…

Do you suggest they keep employees around with nothing to do because of significantly reduced shipping demand? I agree with your point about getting laid off being awful, but I think this should be solved by the government having a robust social safety net (funded by taxes) so that getting laid off doesn’t cause stress. Fortunately, Denmark already scores high in this area.

>Do you suggest they keep employees around with nothing to do because of significantly reduced shipping demand?

It's not unheard of in the past to resort to salary cuts, reduced hours, etc, while they bridge some solution or wait out what might be temporary.

There's also the notion of better planning. If you suspect, for example, a demand spike is temporary...there are ways to deal with that other than overhiring employees.

Re: Maersk to cut 10k jobs as shipping demand drops

#32

Post by boeingUH60 »

franczesko wrote: post #30
boeingUH60 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you suggest they keep employees around with nothing to do because of significantly reduced shipping demand? I agree with your point about getting laid off being awful, but I think this should be solved by the government having a robust social safety net (funded by taxes) so that getting laid off doesn’t cause stress. Fortunately, Denmark already scores high in this area.

"Do you suggest they keep employees around with nothing to do because of significantly reduced shipping demand?" Management should be fired for miscalculated headcount instead.

They hired in response to heightened demand. Demand falls, and they should be fired for miscalculated headcount?

Sorry, but that hardly makes sense…you might as well say management must be able to see the future.

Re: Maersk to cut 10k jobs as shipping demand drops

#33

Post by infecto »

boeingUH60 wrote: post #25
salmonlogs wrote: post #6

> Danish shipping giant Maersk has posted earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) of $30.9bn for the full year ended 31 December 2022, a 57% surge from $19.6bn in 2021. > This is said to be the firm’s best-ever annual result. https://www.ship-technology.com/news/maersk-logs-record-prof... Really sad to see these companies make enormous record beating profits then months later do mass layoffs just to maintain better…

Do you suggest they keep employees around with nothing to do because of significantly reduced shipping demand? I agree with your point about getting laid off being awful, but I think this should be solved by the government having a robust social safety net (funded by taxes) so that getting laid off doesn’t cause stress. Fortunately, Denmark already scores high in this area.

Was unclear in the article but I would be curious if this impacts any workers in Denmark or if this was mostly a cut of the cheap developing nation labor that runs the ship.

Re: Maersk to cut 10k jobs as shipping demand drops

#35

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

gruez wrote: post #16
Lev1a wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this kind of mass-layoffs to maximize earnings is that it's a very short-term gain prioritized over long-term growth, a symptom of the cancer that is the mentality "shareholders expect infinite growth forever".

>it's a very short-term gain prioritized over long-term growth, a symptom of the cancer that is the mentality "shareholders expect infinite growth forever". But "shareholders expect infinite growth forever" directly contradicts "short-term gain prioritized over long-term growth"? Even if they prioritized long term growth that would still be "shareholders expect infinite growth forever".

> But "shareholders expect infinite growth forever" directly contradicts "short-term gain prioritized over long-term growth"?

But it doesn't?

Shareholders expect companies to make whatever decisions are necessary to maximize short term profits, expect those profits to be infinite, and expect this to happen every quarter, every year, in perpetuity.

Re: Maersk to cut 10k jobs as shipping demand drops

#36

Post by smolder »

gruez wrote: post #16
Lev1a wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this kind of mass-layoffs to maximize earnings is that it's a very short-term gain prioritized over long-term growth, a symptom of the cancer that is the mentality "shareholders expect infinite growth forever".

>it's a very short-term gain prioritized over long-term growth, a symptom of the cancer that is the mentality "shareholders expect infinite growth forever". But "shareholders expect infinite growth forever" directly contradicts "short-term gain prioritized over long-term growth"? Even if they prioritized long term growth that would still be "shareholders expect infinite growth forever".

It makes more sense as "shareholders, over the long term, always want high short term growth". It's possible to be focused on short term growth in perpetuity. It's not rational for investors to make demands that harm their own long term goals, but you could argue they do sometimes, at least in aggregate.

Re: Maersk to cut 10k jobs as shipping demand drops

#37

Post by Kye »

fredgrott wrote: post #34

Since this is future demand it might suggest that some significant moves from China manufacturing to N America manufacturing including both Canada and Mexico. A confirmation would be to see if truck traffic through specific border town routes went up.

This might be helpful: https://www.bts.gov/browse-statistical-products-and-data/bor...

And a map with helpful bubbles and options to drill down to various modes: https://explore.dot.gov/views/BorderCrossingData/Map?%3Aembe...

There are tabs at the top of the map with different views. Some are specific to this question.

Re: Maersk to cut 10k jobs as shipping demand drops

#39

Post by sgu999 »

boeingUH60 wrote: post #32
franczesko wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Do you suggest they keep employees around with nothing to do because of significantly reduced shipping demand?" Management should be fired for miscalculated headcount instead.

They hired in response to heightened demand. Demand falls, and they should be fired for miscalculated headcount? Sorry, but that hardly makes sense…you might as well say management must be able to see the future.

> you might as well say management must be able to see the future.

Arguably they can't have ignored that a surge this big would be temporary... It's not like we suddenly discovered a massive amount of resources at our disposal to produce the goods they are transporting.

EDIT: It's frankly amazing to see how much has been projected onto my comment. For the sake of transparency towards the neoliberal police, I quoted what was obviously the only phrase I was answering to.

Re: Maersk to cut 10k jobs as shipping demand drops

#40

Post by lotsofpulp »

sgu999 wrote: post #39
boeingUH60 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They hired in response to heightened demand. Demand falls, and they should be fired for miscalculated headcount? Sorry, but that hardly makes sense…you might as well say management must be able to see the future.

> you might as well say management must be able to see the future. Arguably they can't have ignored that a surge this big would be temporary... It's not like we suddenly discovered a massive amount of resources at our disposal to produce the goods they are transporting. EDIT: It's frankly amazing to see how much has been projected onto my comment. For the sake of transparency towards the neoliberal police, I quoted w…

Should retailers hire more people during holiday season? Or theme parks during summer vacation?
Post reply on HN