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

The upside to being let go by Nokia

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 53 posts

Re: The upside to being let go by Nokia

#41

Post by cobrausn »

Pxtl wrote: post #38
cobrausn wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This completely depends upon the industry, but from my experience in retail, I'd say the percentage of deadbeats / honest folks (when it comes to work ethic) is higher than you might think. At least here in the US.

Well, it's retail. Retail jobs are a dime a dozen. Employees and employers both treat each other as completely expendable. That's why Costco swears by their approach of paying above market rate - it makes sure that their staff actually value their job, because it's not instantly replaceable by walking to the next high-turnover purgatory up the street.

Yeah, there is an establishment north of Houston that is a very common stop on the way from Houston to Dallas. They pay pretty high above market, and from what I can tell, it seems to work. Kinda sad that, by definition, everyone can't do that, although I do wonder if the above market pay just lets you find those who are stuck working retail but are willing to value the job.

Re: The upside to being let go by Nokia

#42

Post by sirkneeland »

Nokia has been a special place to work. I have loved working here and learned so much as the company invested so much in me and in others.

But the market doesn't reward companies for doing the right thing for its employees. It rewards companies for making products that people wanted to buy. And we failed to do that (mainly because we made catastrophically wrong choices in which operating systems to get behind).

It is a shame. As someone staying behind in what is now "New Nokia" I can only hope the company remains a special place to work.

EDIT: by "we" I mean "our leadership". I don't think many of the Nokia rank-and-file would have supported the 2011 decision to do Windows Phone and only Windows Phone (if anyone would have asked them).

Re: The upside to being let go by Nokia

#43

Post by jbuzbee »

qw wrote: post #39
jbuzbee wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, as an employee it would be nice to have a three-month notice. But the downside is that it makes employers hesitant to hire someone in the first place if they know they will be stuck with them for three months. In the situation I described above, the employee in question failed to show up or call in for his very first day of work and gave some poor excuse the next day. And this behavior continued in the following…

" But the downside is that it makes employers hesitant to hire someone in the first place if they know they will be stuck with them for three months. " The 3 month notice period is actually not required by law, but is so widespread that most people assume it is the minimum. The minimum mandatory notice period depends on how long you have worked there. 0-5 years (1 month), 5-10 years (2 months), 10+ years (3 months).…

That sounds like a pretty good compromise, but you can imagine that it will still cause permanent employment friction. For example, say you run a small contracting company with a few 3-month probationary employees on staff. You're waiting to hear about the next big job. When that 3-month period gets close and you still haven't got word on the new job, you might be tempted to let them go because if the job doesn't come in, you'll be paying their salaries without the equivalent revenue coming in. That could break your small company. If the job does come in, you'll need to scramble to replace them and push your permanent staff harder, but you'll still be in business. If you weren't bound by a three-month requirement, you might have keep the probationary employees on staff a bit longer waiting for the job to come in.

The real-world isn't this cut-and-dried, but to a lesser extent, these are the tradeoffs that the employer has to make every day.

Re: The upside to being let go by Nokia

#44

Post by sirkneeland »

A great difference between Nokia and, say, Zynga:

When Nokia killed MeeGo, they let Jolla take the technology and make a new company out of it when they could have easily thwarted it with any number of legal/IP/HR chokeholds. But Nokia looked the other way and let Jolla continue.

When Zynga killed OMGpop (of "Draw Something" fame), the original people wanted to keep OMGpop going, and even offered to buy it back from Zynga. Zynga refused and insisted OMGpop's remains be destroyed.

Good Guy Nokia

Re: The upside to being let go by Nokia

#45

Post by _random_ »

gordaco wrote: post #25
zura wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, 6 figures salary is as well a rarity in Euros (in EUR currency countries) for engineers. EDIT: I should had put more emphasis on "rarity" - lets say almost unimaginable. At least, I have an impression that it is much more common in USA.

Speaking as another European who has always been put off by the usual American conditions, money is not a very big concern to me beyond my (admittedly quite frugal) standard of living. Time is a far, far, far more important resource, and working in the USA seems to include insane hours and constant overtime and few vacations. Also, I think you don't need that much money in Europe, thanks to things like socialized hea…

Also food companies are allowed to do way more dodgy stuff in USA. E.g. M&Ms can't even sell their peanut-butter version in UK because of additives.

Re: The upside to being let go by Nokia

#47

Post by badman_ting »

pjmlp wrote: post #5
probablyfiction wrote: post #3

It's very difficult to imagine an American company doing this, especially in the face of declining revenue. American corporations have a ways to go when it comes to treating employees like human beings rather than resources.

As European, I have been always put off by the work conditions there.

Me too, except I lived here all my life.

Re: The upside to being let go by Nokia

#48

Post by AceJohnny2 »

sirkneeland wrote: post #44

A great difference between Nokia and, say, Zynga: When Nokia killed MeeGo, they let Jolla take the technology and make a new company out of it when they could have easily thwarted it with any number of legal/IP/HR chokeholds. But Nokia looked the other way and let Jolla continue. When Zynga killed OMGpop (of "Draw Something" fame), the original people wanted to keep OMGpop going, and even offered to buy it back from…

See also Valve, Jeri Ellsworth and Rick Johnson, who were let go but allowed to take the tech they were working on to start CastAR:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/technicalillusions/cast...

It's a pity that these situations are notable and not the default.

Re: The upside to being let go by Nokia

#49

Post by Rezo »

dijit wrote: post #2

Good PR for Nokia, it was a lovely company but I don't see how they are still relevant in this time of Android and iOS. The Windows phone, while not terrible, is completely eclipsed by the forerunners which have cornered the smartphone and tablet markets, using experience to guide them. Windows mobile seems to still operate under the illusion that they can dictate how you use your phone, which would work, if they'd b…

With the sale of the phone business to MS, Nokia is pivoting to mapping and connected cars: http://conversations.nokia.com/2012/09/28/top-auto-brands-tu...

Nokia bought Navteq for ~$8 billion a few years back. They're the only source for mapping data that is comparable to Google.

Re: The upside to being let go by Nokia

#50

Post by qw »

jbuzbee wrote: post #43
qw wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" But the downside is that it makes employers hesitant to hire someone in the first place if they know they will be stuck with them for three months. " The 3 month notice period is actually not required by law, but is so widespread that most people assume it is the minimum. The minimum mandatory notice period depends on how long you have worked there. 0-5 years (1 month), 5-10 years (2 months), 10+ years (3 months).…

That sounds like a pretty good compromise, but you can imagine that it will still cause permanent employment friction. For example, say you run a small contracting company with a few 3-month probationary employees on staff. You're waiting to hear about the next big job. When that 3-month period gets close and you still haven't got word on the new job, you might be tempted to let them go because if the job doesn't com…

Most companies specify a 6 month probation period where the contract can be terminated with 1 month notice. That should be enough to plan ahead.

The customary 3 month notice only applies to "permanent" employees, but the company is free to specify a 1 month notice for those employed for less than 5 years if they are not confident.

Post reply on HN