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

Layoffs Don't Work

thehustle.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 801 posts

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#171

Post by whiplash451 »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #150

Real talk here, and I'm sorry for being "that guy" Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? I know multiple people who have worked their entire career thus far without ever staying at a place for more than 3 or 4 years. Some no more than two. Tech job culture is practically a mono culture with "hop jobs" being a hallmark. From an employ…

The thing is, the tech industry is also an outlier in a sense that the quality of the job you find varies massively depending on (1) the timing, sometimes literally by a few weeks and (2) whether you already have a job or not.

And so, layoffs are not "just another bump" in people's career. They represent a major net negative for people who would otherwise have much more control over the trajectory.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#172

Post by atrettel »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #150

Real talk here, and I'm sorry for being "that guy" Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? I know multiple people who have worked their entire career thus far without ever staying at a place for more than 3 or 4 years. Some no more than two. Tech job culture is practically a mono culture with "hop jobs" being a hallmark. From an employ…

This is an interesting question to ask, though I personally would not attribute it to "culture" as much as it may be a product of the environment people are put in. From my experience, there are a lot of jobs that make it difficult to continue past a few years, so job hopping is the inevitable outcome of that. I think many companies need to examine why they have a lot of turnover instead of attributing it all to individual employees.

And to be frank, layoffs are scary for any industry, because they usually are correlated with layoffs at other companies. A rising tide lifts all boats, but a sinking tide is difficult to escape. You might be laid off at a time when there is no other job to hop to.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#173

Post by BowBun »

sejje wrote: post #124
EPWN3D wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Top performers have options and value stability. They also know that they rely on their manager to accurately reflect their work up the chain. Some percentage of top performers report to deadbeat managers, so in an environment doing mandatory layoffs, they'll know that it doesn't matter how much they knock it out of the park, their manager will screw them. So of course they'll leave.

If you're a top performer stuck under a deadbeat manager, how are you able to signal to new companies that you're a top performer? I read posts here all the time about how hard it is to hire. How do top performers distinguish themselves as they go out for new jobs? When did this become easy?

> How do top performers distinguish themselves as they go out for new jobs?

During an interview process, and by using your network. Top performers aren't usually slinging applications through LinkedIn in my limited experience

> When did this become easy? It isn't, they're referred to as top performers for a reason. It's easier for folks who excel in their fields, and that holds true across domains.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#174

Post by da_chicken »

dylan604 wrote: post #131
fx1994 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are a small team in big company, and management that made wrong decisions is still somewhere there but not my direct management, still getting same paycheck, car, cards and benefits but new managers (that accepted to take over and got brand new car for 100k€, cards and bonuses, bells and whistles) started to layoff workers so we know this is the end for my team, and of course they will do whatever it takes to "sav…

If your small team in a big company does not directly generate money, then you’d definitely be ripe for elimination. Time and time again we’ve seen examples of trams that are critical to supporting various revenue generating parts of the company while not directly making money themselves get cut as an “obvious” way to save money when only looking at the books. Been there.

The thing is, ending a product that's not making money shouldn't mean eliminating the workers. Those were people you picked, brought in, and have adapted to your culture.

It always strikes me as weird when a product fails and the decision is to eliminate everyone from the product manager down... and then make no other changes. Then they bring in completely new people for whatever the new product line is. Sometimes, sure, an individual or group might cause a product to fail that should otherwise succeed. But it's weird to default to the production team. Is it a design problem? A maintenance problem? A product price problem? A sales and marketing problem? A management problem?

Like, the Pontiac Aztek did not do badly because one welder from Mexico screwed it up. It failed because it was ugly. It was ugly because the styling didn't survive the requirements to use the same parts as the Buick Rendezvous and the same basic platform as the Pontiac Montana. The process of making that vehicle fit into GM at that time killed the product. Today the Chevrolet Equinox, a direct descendent, is one of the best selling vehicles on the road at a time when there's a lot more competition.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#175

Post by no_wizard »

steveBK123 wrote: post #29
roenxi wrote: post #17

> Research has consistently shown he was right about layoffs: They’re damaging to companies... The research is probably misleading. The damage was done to companies when the over-hired people who couldn't add enough value to justify keeping them employed. The layoffs are just when the damage is recognised. It is like borrowing a huge amount of money, using 90% of it it to buy prawns and leaving them out to rot for a…

This would be more true of management did not play BS with the numbers constantly. I worked at a firm that for 2-3 years straight would report great Q1,Q2,Q3 numbers.. tell employees it's looking like a good year. And then Q4 report a total wipeout loss that negated the quarterly earnings and swung the company to flat or a loss. Whoops, sorry, no raises, cutting bonuses.. and need to do some layoffs. Behavior like th…

And to top it all off executives never have to eat the shit they caused in the same way the rest of the workforce at the company ends up having to

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#176

Post by jarsin »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #41

I remember hearing a take on layoffs that I think is pretty true: When you fire the bottom 10%, you lose another 10% who are from the top performers. The destruction of psychological safety for everyone at the company is irreparable, and you start to bleed your most productive talent, too.

I don't think its only psychological safety. If the top performers lose staff that did the mundane crap and now they have to do it they start to really pay attention to what the management is actually doing.

Every layoff I have ever survived the staff inevitably ends up talking about how so and so manager and his favorite buddies are still out golfing every friday. Why the f are they still here etc.

This resentment builds and builds.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#177

Post by munificent »

filoleg wrote: post #160
Workaccount2 wrote: post #150

Real talk here, and I'm sorry for being "that guy" Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? I know multiple people who have worked their entire career thus far without ever staying at a place for more than 3 or 4 years. Some no more than two. Tech job culture is practically a mono culture with "hop jobs" being a hallmark. From an employ…

I cannot speak for layoffs in all industries ever, but I agree with your assessment of layoffs in big tech from personal experiences. I have way too many “lifer” friends in big tech who are deadly scared of layoffs and job hopping. They are also the ones who rarely got promoted and havent had a significant pay bump pretty much ever. On another hand, half my team at a big tech company got laid off back at the start of…

A few months of skiing sounds nice, but not as nice as the profound pleasure of working on a team of people I've know and cared about for over a decade.

You're going to spend half your waking life at work. For me, that's too much time to not want to do so at a place where I have real relationships with my coworkers.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#178

Post by no_wizard »

brigandish wrote: post #43
fzeroracer wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2) That is sensible for the company. They have no idea how to use a 10x engineer, as can be detected by the fact that they're having layoffs. They don't know how to create value in the market and they're being forced into a position where they have to squeeze what they can out of what assets they have. Okay, now explain why every company is encountering these issues where they're frequently laying off people and ar…

> now explain why every company is encountering these issues where they're frequently laying off people and are unable to create value. Creating value is hard.

Seemingly executives being held accountable is even harder, as it rarely happens

Edit: Please reply with concrete evidence of widespread accountability of executives

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#179

Post by callc »

nthingtohide wrote: post #91
kibwen wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stock market is just a predictions market, and any predictions market at scale destroys the subject of its prediction.

Can we have a different kind of stock market which forces participants to consider long term outcomes more? E.g. no HFT firm should be able to make a profit from such a stock market. Selling stocks earlier and often should result in a penalty or percentage being taken away as a fee. As a retail investor I would love to use invest and forget strategy based on trends observed in such a stock market.

Consider no stock market. Just keep the company private.

Honest question, why do so many companies strive to go public?

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#180

Post by silisili »

marto1 wrote: post #46
andrenotgiant wrote: post #44

> After the early-2000s dotcom bust, Bain researchers found that stock prices for S&P 500 companies that had no layoffs or laid off less than 3% of their workforce increased an average of 9% in the next year. Meanwhile, stock prices were flat in companies that laid off between 3%-10% of their workers, and prices plummeted 38% for companies that laid off more than 10%. Failing companies go through layoffs. Companies l…

> But everyone knows that's not what killed them. Another addition I'd like to add here is more often then not wrong people get booted while the "dead weight" tends to stick around and becomes even deader due to a motivation fall from the layoff. So maybe it doesn't kill, but for sure exacerbates an already bad situation.

Unfortunately, optimizing for not getting yourself laid off is not the same as optimizing for max productivity. In many ways, they're quite opposite.
Post reply on HN