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

Large Round of Layoffs Expected at Microsoft

bits.blogs.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 251 posts

Re: Large Round of Layoffs Expected at Microsoft

#121

Post by TheMagicHorsey »

swalsh wrote: post #104
TheMagicHorsey wrote: post #18

Any company that has been around for as long as Microsoft, has a huge amount of dead weight in its mid-level management. I mean people whose main skill is mastery of the internal political process. Lest people think I'm singling out Microsoft specifically, this same problem is present at Google as well, but is less of a problem because Google has not been around long enough to pick up the same amount of dead weight p…

Its good in theory, but in practice it doesn't work. Those guys who mastered the political process. They don't get fired. Not getting fired is what they do. Thats the thing they're really good at.

I should have elaborated.

You are right, hiring and firing is a political process, and so you are right, its vulnerable to manipulation by the shrewdest political players.

My assumption, however, is that the layoffs are managed by senior management, who are the shrewdest of all the political players. If they do layoffs right, they put the power of firing into the hands of people in a separate power structure. I mean people like external consultants, or a special committee.

If that isn't the case; and if mid-level management is providing the data to direct layoffs, then yes, its a colossal disaster.

Re: Large Round of Layoffs Expected at Microsoft

#123

Post by Scoundreller »

jqm wrote: post #33
tphan wrote: post #10

I knew Microsoft was on the way out but I didn't know the situation was so bad. Hopefully those who lost their jobs will find a place at Google or Apple.

Microsoft has a lot of cash and a huge mass of captive customers who will stay captive customers if they clean up their act just a little bit. I wouldn't call demise just yet. They will be around for a long time to come and may just surprise everyone. Not that I care. I don't use Microsoft products and given the choice never will. And I don't care for their general behavior as a company. I never thought it was a good…

Governments and other bigco's are still as willing as ever to lock themselves into vendors. I don't see this changing soon at the OS level when they can't even sort themselves out at the application level.

Re: Large Round of Layoffs Expected at Microsoft

#124

Post by tdicola »

peterjancelis wrote: post #73
TheMagicHorsey wrote: post #18

Any company that has been around for as long as Microsoft, has a huge amount of dead weight in its mid-level management. I mean people whose main skill is mastery of the internal political process. Lest people think I'm singling out Microsoft specifically, this same problem is present at Google as well, but is less of a problem because Google has not been around long enough to pick up the same amount of dead weight p…

This is why I believe in a Semco type culture where every team member receives a cut of the profits and there is a peer review process of who gets to join / stay in the team. It's the most realistic way a profitably franchise can avoid taking in the political rent seekers. What you spend more on profit share you probably make back on cost savings, and at the very least it buys you a more happy, productive workforce.

Microsoft is a publically traded company, they have a fiduciary responsibility to return their profits to shareholders and not employees, for better or worse.

Re: Large Round of Layoffs Expected at Microsoft

#125

Post by neutronman »

Spooky23 wrote: post #82
TallGuyShort wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Layoffs are a sign that a company has been struggling, or has been slowing, or has grown disproportionately in personell, but that someone is doing something that probably needs to be done. It is not always the solution, but it is also not a sign of ultimate doom.

From what I've heard, if you're not working on cloud services, you're a dinosaur. They just let go of XP and cloud services are making the need to support office version X for 10 years less relevant. MS must spend a ridiculous amount of time & treasure supporting old crap.

They sold Windows 3.1 until the year 2008. I would agree that they spend way too many resources on the past.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_3.1x

Re: Large Round of Layoffs Expected at Microsoft

#126

Post by crag »

fredophile wrote: post #38
poof131 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The military is especially prone to this problem. I’d hesitate to refer to people as dead weight, but the retirement structure encourages mid-level management to hang-on for twenty. Even if people are burnt out after 10 years, which the military is very capable of doing, many stay even when they and the Service would be better off if they moved on.

The problem with the military is how benefits are set up. There is a big jump in benefits at twenty years. If you put in 10-12 years your benefits aren't significantly better than someone who just did minimal time. If there was a small jump around the ten year point they'd probably see people willing to stop there instead of holding out 8-10 more years.

It's also a feeling of being stuck. I mean, you a 13B, where you gonna get a job? At Burger King? And you're (were) an E6; a platoon leader with responsibility for personnel and artillery equipment worth millions and now you're flipping burgers?

I've always thought the Army needed a job training problem (maybe through the VA, if nothing else) where you could "un-learn" your military skills in favor of civilian skills.

Re: Large Round of Layoffs Expected at Microsoft

#127

Post by r00fus »

sirmarksalot wrote: post #98
cpeterso wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And contractors don't get stock options. Microsoft has gotten in trouble before about their use of "permanent contractors".

The stock isn't really a big deal anymore now that the company is stable, more or less. Back in the '90s, however, some preferred stock could mean retiring at age 35. And when the orange-badges started seeing their officemates buying mansions and supercars, despite not having worked all that much harder, they felt the need to get the lawyers involved.

Is this the case? I mean, sure options won't be as lucrative, but RSUs are basically an extra way for companies to compensate employees, and still count as "velvet handcuffs".

If the stock rises, that's magnified, but even while relatively static, RSUs count up.

Re: Large Round of Layoffs Expected at Microsoft

#128

Post by crag »

JibberMeTimbers wrote: post #47
kabdib wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the last layoffs, many of the people who were let go were back working for Microsoft again in a year or so (often as full-time employees, more often as contractors). I believe that Microsoft has more contractors than it does employees. That is just crazy. Also, it's nearly impossible to fire even the most grossly incompetent people. One person I worked with was a utter flatline and doing negative work (very bad Q/…

Contractors can be cheaper than employees, despite paying a higher salary. The reason is that they don't need to do so much legal work or pay their insurances and etc, etc. When a project is finished, they can just end the contract and avoid all of the legality. I've known many people that leave their job as employee and get contracted to the same company for those reasons (and more).

Or it's about appearances.

You know the government does this all the time. Congress mandates a department cuts their budget. So ok.. fine, the director lays off the IT department. Then all the "deferred" IT folk go to work at"some consulting company" who get the contract to provide IT services to the department. At twice the price the original payroll was.

it happens all the time in government. And not just in IT.

Re: Large Round of Layoffs Expected at Microsoft

#129

Post by tdicola »

anoothrowaway wrote: post #122

As someone starting at Microsoft in the near future, should this make me worried?

No, MS isn't in dire straits that they need to start letting the lowest guys on the totem pole go. For the first couple years focus on being the best employee possible and making your manager's life easier. Don't shy away from doing the boring, ugly grunt work that no one else wants to do. You need to establish yourself as a reliable performer.

Re: Large Round of Layoffs Expected at Microsoft

#130

Post by Hermel »

tdicola wrote: post #124
peterjancelis wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I believe in a Semco type culture where every team member receives a cut of the profits and there is a peer review process of who gets to join / stay in the team. It's the most realistic way a profitably franchise can avoid taking in the political rent seekers. What you spend more on profit share you probably make back on cost savings, and at the very least it buys you a more happy, productive workforce.

Microsoft is a publically traded company, they have a fiduciary responsibility to return their profits to shareholders and not employees, for better or worse.

This is a myth often used to justify unpopular decisions. The board has a responsibility to guide the company in accordance with the articles, but the shareholders are free to define the articles. If they think redistributing profits to employees is a good idea, they are free to do so.
Post reply on HN