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

ASML staffing changes could result in a net reduction of around 1700 positions

asml.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 366 posts

Re: ASML staffing changes could result in a net reduction of around 1700 positions

#341

Post by Scarblac »

speleding wrote: post #273
Wurdan wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an engineering manager (and one who's slowly starting a job hunt) these comments don't make for comfortable reading. What we'll never know from a press release like this is whether this is a change that employees wanted, or one which senior leadership wanted. Sure there are companies where management is overly bloated or inefficient. And maybe I'm just flattering myself by thinking that my teams' lives wouldn't be…

When I worked as a strategy consultant in the Netherlands (albeit decades ago), the rule of thumb was that any organization that had not seen a reorganization for five years would accumulate at least 10% of dead weight. (Mainly due to very strict labour laws that make it very costly to fire someone.) ASML has 44,000 staff total, not sure how many are managers, but the 1,700 number does not strike me as particularly a…

This is about the engineering department, which apparently has 16000 employees now. With 4500 managers!

They're going to 1500, 1300ish can become engineers, 1700 are let go.

Re: ASML staffing changes could result in a net reduction of around 1700 positions

#342

Post by jorvi »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #327
jorvi wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But both dividends and stock buybacks are terrible and really shouldn't exist. In a proper market, competition is so fierce that you cannot afford dividends / stock buybacks because your competitors will put all their money towards R&D and retaining & attracting the best personnel. Then again, this has been going on for decades. Businesses used to be about being the best for your customers and personnel. But it's all…

Why would anybody invest in a business that never produces a return?

The return is in the increase in value of the stock?

Dividends have only existed since the 1960s and stock buybacks only became mainstream in the 1980s. Stocks have existed in some form since the 1600s.

Re: ASML staffing changes could result in a net reduction of around 1700 positions

#343

Post by Havoc »

bpodgursky wrote: post #306
Havoc wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, they are equals. People want this to be true but it just isn’t in reality and can’t be. Companies are pyramid shaped and the higher up you go the more managing you do and correspondingly less engineering. It’s baked into the structure that seniority and power is biased towards managers

Sort of. There's a distinction between "managing" and "using people as resources" in many tech companies. Many senior ICs at tech companies DO have teams assigned to them for technical tasks, but they don't have to deal with giving feedback, managing compensation, giving bonuses, hiring, etc etc. Basically they get assigned extra hands and arms to do their tasks but aren't responsible for their growth or happiness.

There is a reason you mainly see that in tech companies. Causes more problems than it solves but tech companies do it anyway for the sake of keeping top engineers happy.

If you disconnect the people in the trenches from the giving feedback & managing people then you need a whole army of people with elaborate systems and KPI scoring in background trying to reconnect the dots again so that comp and feedback have some linkage to reality.

i.e. it's done yes but it's an aberration in terms of company structuring.

Re: ASML staffing changes could result in a net reduction of around 1700 positions

#344

Post by blibble »

jorvi wrote: post #342
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anybody invest in a business that never produces a return?

The return is in the increase in value of the stock? Dividends have only existed since the 1960s and stock buybacks only became mainstream in the 1980s. Stocks have existed in some form since the 1600s.

you realise most companies are private and don't have publicly tradable shares?

very common: a small company with a couple shareholders of that aren't employees

without dividends, how can the shareholders get THEIR profits out of THEIR company, without giving up control?

just leave them in there forever?

Re: ASML staffing changes could result in a net reduction of around 1700 positions

#345

Post by bpodgursky »

Havoc wrote: post #343
bpodgursky wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sort of. There's a distinction between "managing" and "using people as resources" in many tech companies. Many senior ICs at tech companies DO have teams assigned to them for technical tasks, but they don't have to deal with giving feedback, managing compensation, giving bonuses, hiring, etc etc. Basically they get assigned extra hands and arms to do their tasks but aren't responsible for their growth or happiness.

There is a reason you mainly see that in tech companies. Causes more problems than it solves but tech companies do it anyway for the sake of keeping top engineers happy. If you disconnect the people in the trenches from the giving feedback & managing people then you need a whole army of people with elaborate systems and KPI scoring in background trying to reconnect the dots again so that comp and feedback have some l…

It's worth it in tech companies because top performing engineers have disproportionate impact relative to average ICs. It doesn't "cause more problems than it solves". It is a correct tradeoff on balance.

Re: ASML staffing changes could result in a net reduction of around 1700 positions

#346

Post by lbreakjai »

direwolf20 wrote: post #331
lbreakjai wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If nobody is employed, then nobody has any money to live in a house, and the landlord doesn't get any rent.

The landlord then has the right to make someone homeless, for no benefit to anybody, just out of spite that he isn't getting rent.

Sure. But he still doesn't have the money to buy the labour the OP was wanting to sell. Which was the point of the argument: If you think AI will destroy most white collar jobs, learning a trade won't help.

Re: ASML staffing changes could result in a net reduction of around 1700 positions

#347

Post by pseudalopex »

danpalmer wrote: post #70

Can we change "firing" to "laying off", it's a big difference to perception and legal status. Plus it's literally the title of the article as per HN guidelines.

> Can we change "firing" to "laying off", it's a big difference to perception and legal status.

Firing does not mean what you thought probably.[1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45733016

Re: ASML staffing changes could result in a net reduction of around 1700 positions

#348

Post by pseudalopex »

skrebbel wrote: post #69
joe_mamba wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I interviewed with ASML a decade and a half ago and [...] I didn't feel at the time feel like it was a very top-heavy organization True, but here's the real kicker: when you add almost 15 years of ZIRP hyper growth since when you applied, you'll then see the same pattern in most big tech companies: overhiring, empire building and management bloat with no proportional increase in innovation or productivity, just hiri…

Yep! That's kinda what I said, no? :-)

I could not find where you said the same pattern was in most big tech companies. Or connected ZIRP.

Re: ASML staffing changes could result in a net reduction of around 1700 positions

#349

Post by tonyedgecombe »

jorvi wrote: post #342
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anybody invest in a business that never produces a return?

The return is in the increase in value of the stock? Dividends have only existed since the 1960s and stock buybacks only became mainstream in the 1980s. Stocks have existed in some form since the 1600s.

>The return is in the increase in value of the stock?

There will never be an increase in the value of the stock if there is no expected return.

If you go back to the 1600's then shareholders got their return from liquidation payouts. Someone would invest in a voyage and when the ship returned the spoils were the paid out and the company was liquidated. Not so different from a dividend really and it clearly wouldn't work for a modern industrial economy.

Re: ASML staffing changes could result in a net reduction of around 1700 positions

#350

Post by tonyedgecombe »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #336
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anybody invest in a business that never produces a return?

Ideally, people wouldn’t have any money to invest because they all earn the same amount, which they all spend on the same expenses, otherwise it gets taxed and redistributed.

Which is incoherent as it works against human nature.
Post reply on HN