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

Why top firms fire good workers

rochester.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 263 posts

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#91

Post by II2II »

idiotsecant wrote: post #65
autoexec wrote: post #56

> The firm starts to underpay those better workers who kept their jobs, akin to making them pay for being “chosen.” Consequently, profits do not decline and may even increase. > “Firms now essentially can threaten the remaining employees: ‘Look, I can let you go, and everybody’s going to think that you’re the worst in the pool. If you want me not to let you go, you need to accept below market wages,’” This is exactly…

For whatever reason collective bargaining is wildly unpopular on HN, which is ironic because tech workers are exactly who should be organizing their labor.

Ideally, there would be stronger and enforced labour regulations since the government can serve as a neutral third party. That said, I also realize that we don't live in an ideal world and governments tend to be more in touch with the needs of businesses than the needs of the people they are supposed to represent. There are many reasons for that, without resorting to conspiracy theories (but you are welcome to believe in conspiracy theories if that's your thing).

Unions are low on my list to address labour issues. They create a whole slew of problems, but I also recognize that collectivized bargaining is one of the few tools workers have to represent their interests so I see them as a necessary evil.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#92

Post by diogenescynic »

tormeh wrote: post #60
diogenescynic wrote: post #46

Every job I've ever had started great with a small team who was actually interested in the company and its goals. Then eventually the company scales up, gets acquired, or IPOs or some other sign of maturity and a new group of leadership is brought in from a legacy/Fortune 500 type of company. That new group of leadership brings their own cabal/clique and they only promote themselves and start slowly pushing out the o…

Are you sure you're not just seeing the transition of a company from a growth company to a value company? I.e. "there is no growth potential left. Let's dump it on the public", and then a new leadership team comes in slashing costs to juice profits, because there's no way to increase revenue. Because that's certainly a phenomenon as well.

That's definitely part of it, but I've noticed there's almost always a shift when companies get to a certain size and start bringing in leadership in waves from other companies and it really changes the culture and dynamics of how the company functions--usually not for the better.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#93

Post by windex »

nitinreddy88 wrote: post #24
windex wrote: post #19

The method used in all the big4s in India is this: You join and do well as usual. Your credit is shared by those above you. You continue to do well, your manager gets promoted or you get a manager who needs a promotion and needs the credit you generate. He gets promoted, aggregates your good work and shows it as his. You then get sidelined, PIPed, or leave in disgust. It's political and I have begun to strongly belie…

This is outright stupid to believe. I have been working for past 15yrs and worked across startups to Top 5(FAANG), and never seen or gone through this.

Happens in consulting more often than you think. Product firms run different or at least that's what I assume. I haven't worked in FAANG but have worked in the Big4s, and a couple of Fortune 50 manufacturing firms. The experience I talk of has to do with the Big4.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#94

Post by gedy »

blindhippo wrote: post #87
gedy wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only speak for myself, but I think there is a naive idealist view of (modern, American) unions that gloss over the tradeoffs. I don't want another bureaucratic layer that tells me what to do, and run by yet more HR admin-types. We aren't working in the coal mines or steel mills here in the 1920s. Sorry I'm not interested in that for office jobs. I'm glad they still work in some countries and cultures.

I don't care what kind or style of job - if the balance of power in any labour relationship is overwhelmingly on the employer side, collective action is the only way labour can regain a modicum of negotiating power. To think that the style of job has any bearing on this relationship is naive.

I do agree collective action specifically can help, but not via organizing with a modern American Union.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#95

Post by distances »

zwnow wrote: post #75
consp wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of IT jobs pay pretty meager here. There are some exceptions but not that much. You gave to be "manager" to get any decent pay most of the time.

Hmm most people I know earn well above median and whenever I look at my regions statistics it confirms that... Joining an union would mean cuts to these people. I am a fan of unions for low pay jobs but not in tech.

Why do you think unions would mean salary cuts? Unions don't set maximum salaries. You are absolutely free to negotiate your salary, raises, promotions, and so on.

In the Nordics quite many tech workers are in unions. For most people it's perhaps just about habits and solidarity, but they do offer tangible benefits like free consultation and legal representation in a case of dispute with your employer.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#96

Post by ChadNauseam »

palmotea wrote: post #70
Denote6737 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tech attracts the radical independent types.

> Tech attracts the radical independent types. No. I think it's a combination of: 1) HN being associated with a startup incubator, and thus attracting a large contingent of people who see themselves as the boss doing this, not the workers affected; 2) tech attracts a certain kind of gullible person who's easily seduced by tidy little systems like the pop-capitalism of libertarian tracts; and 3) tech workers (until re…

Tech people would obviously be well served by being in the union. If you make a cartel with other people who can do the same job as you, and you don't profit from that, you're doing something terribly wrong.

The reason I'm opposed to it isn't because it wouldn't be good for tech people. I'm opposed to it because in general I think it would be more bad for everyone else than it would be good for tech people. I expect they would see fewer products, higher prices on the products that they have, and lower quality products. Additionally, I expect the union to advocate for the interests of the tech workers, which would generally be for tech workers to make more money, and not in the interests of broader society.

You can see a great example of this with the AMA, which did a great job advocating for the government to reduce the number of new doctors. It's probably great for existing doctors, but the rest of us should not be happy that we're paying more for our healthcare because of it.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#97

Post by zwnow »

distances wrote: post #95
zwnow wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm most people I know earn well above median and whenever I look at my regions statistics it confirms that... Joining an union would mean cuts to these people. I am a fan of unions for low pay jobs but not in tech.

Why do you think unions would mean salary cuts? Unions don't set maximum salaries. You are absolutely free to negotiate your salary, raises, promotions, and so on. In the Nordics quite many tech workers are in unions. For most people it's perhaps just about habits and solidarity, but they do offer tangible benefits like free consultation and legal representation in a case of dispute with your employer.

Because companies are going to base salaries on collective agreements with the union which are usually lower compared to the salary high paying jobs have. At least that's how unions work in my country.

Unions are powerful because they can call for protests and employees who are in a union cant get laid off due to joining the protest. But its not worth if the job already has way better working conditions than like 80% of jobs out there.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#98

Post by anonymouskimmer »

autoexec wrote: post #56

> The firm starts to underpay those better workers who kept their jobs, akin to making them pay for being “chosen.” Consequently, profits do not decline and may even increase. > “Firms now essentially can threaten the remaining employees: ‘Look, I can let you go, and everybody’s going to think that you’re the worst in the pool. If you want me not to let you go, you need to accept below market wages,’” This is exactly…

More ideal solutions than unions are: 1) Employee owned businesses with low levels of hierarchy and fast vesting in ownership; 2) Enough competitors in a hot enough labor market that employees jump ship themselves before they can be let go.

But yes, unions are great particularly when the labor market is tough.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#99

Post by shoo »

A version of the paper can be downloaded from SSRN:

Kaniel, Ron and Orlov, Dmitry, Intermediated Asymmetric Information, Compensation, and Career Prospects (February 4, 2020). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3532128

see also: discussion of the consulting business model from David Maister’s book Managing the Professional Service Firm

https://commoncog.com/the-consulting-business-model/

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#100

Post by z3dd »

zwnow wrote: post #69
idiotsecant wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For whatever reason collective bargaining is wildly unpopular on HN, which is ironic because tech workers are exactly who should be organizing their labor.

Tech salaries are too high for people to do that. At least in Europe. Having an union will fuck with peoples salaries.

I don't think you know what you're talking about, or you are omitting western Europe. In Germany/Austria most workers are on collective bargaining agreements (different and specific for each industry, incl IT) which is regulated by unions plus org-specific councils (Betriebsräte in AT/DE, similar in other countries). Similar for Switzerland, also Collective labour agreements in Netherlands. Seems to be similar in Spain and France but these I didn't have experience with. So yeah, your comment is at least misleading or ignorant and bullshit at most
Post reply on HN