Buffer Layoffs • Hacker News Board

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#101

Post by unabst » Thu, Jun 16, 2016, 9:48 PM UTC

compiler-guy wrote: post #36

This may be a little cynical but: "With our culture of bringing our whole selves to work and seeing team as family, with shared values we live by,..." In the American business world, you are an employee until you aren't. Confusing being an employee with being "family" is a mistake, both for the company and the employee. When times get bad, companies do what it takes to survive, including throwing employees overboard.…

Family and community and culture happen organically so long as we are all humans. The company is what is structural and functional, with its existence depending solely on the performance of its functions. The problem is that the structure that gives rise to these functions are real humans. That is why restructuring implies firing people.

In the beginning the rewards from the human elements are far greater than the performance of the company. It could even be all you've got. You could have no profits, be in stealth, just prototyping, etc. Here the company could just be a promise written on a napkin or a handshake between founders. It could dissolve any minute.

Eventually though, once the company grows to the point where it hires people and makes money and pays taxes, the value of the company begins to far outweigh that of any individual member, or of any organic human elements that tends to adjust themselves anyway. This is when the company you founded might turn around and fire you. But congratulations, that's also when you know you've (sort of) made it...

The takeaways is to know your function. So long as you do, you should be able to predict if you belong. And if you know you don't, you should expect to be let off, knowing only that the people running the company are doing their job correctly.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#102

Post by jes » Thu, Jun 16, 2016, 9:49 PM UTC

terrywilcox wrote: post #81

jes wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kicking your child out of the house for doing what a child does is not in your long-term self interest or his.

Correct. Put him up for adoption instead.

I'm unclear as to whether this was meant to be sarcastic or not.

My point is this: Children have a certain nature; part of being a child is development of the ability to regulate one's emotions. Loving, thoughtful parents will (hopefully) learn about such things, such as Dr. Porges "Polyvagal Theory" and then be able to help their children with this process.

I am not suggesting that people should abandon important relationships on a whim. I apologize if I was unclear on this.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#103

Post by dave2000 » Thu, Jun 16, 2016, 9:49 PM UTC

compiler-guy wrote: post #58

kordless wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree with your points, I think the ongoing assumption we can effectively emulate the emotional response of the ones who are actually are affected is starting to really get in the way. The expectation humanity can eliminate all suffering is unreasonable. That expectation is, in my humble option, an inefficiency driven by unreasonable sympathy. When I say "unreasonable" I mean laying blame where it isn't ours…

I've both layed people off and been laid off. I have a pretty good idea of what both sides feel like. Both sides suck. Really bad. It hurts like hell. Probably worse to be layed off than do the laying off.

Probably? Odd thing to say. If someone actually believed that they would quit rather than lay someone off.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#104

Post by boucher » Thu, Jun 16, 2016, 9:50 PM UTC

carc wrote: post #95

kybernetikos wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some startups take your equity off you if you leave.

They can't just take away equity that's vested to you. And any equity that hasn't vested isn't yours.

They can't take it away arbitrarily, but unless you're in a good personal financial position there's a good chance you'll lose it anyway.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#105

Post by st3v3r » Thu, Jun 16, 2016, 9:51 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #4

minimaxir wrote: post #2

While Buffer's transparency is incredible, the financial calculations in the article fail to account for the possibility of an employee exodus domino effect, especially after both knowing the financial state of the company, and relevant perks being cut.

Is it possible to stem an employee exodus when fully transparent? I don't think so. It only works when there's a level of information asymmetry.

I think it is, unless your situation is so terrible where you don't think you'll be around in 3-6 months.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#106

Post by blacksmythe » Thu, Jun 16, 2016, 9:51 PM UTC

hopsoft wrote: post #71

compiler-guy wrote: post #36

This may be a little cynical but: "With our culture of bringing our whole selves to work and seeing team as family, with shared values we live by,..." In the American business world, you are an employee until you aren't. Confusing being an employee with being "family" is a mistake, both for the company and the employee. When times get bad, companies do what it takes to survive, including throwing employees overboard.…

> Don't confuse your job with your family. Reminds me of this terrific article from David Brady. https://heartmindcode.com/2013/08/16/loyalty-and-layoffs/

  >> (our VP) specifically named you because your piece is finished.

That is really poor, short-sighted management.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#107

Post by st3v3r » Thu, Jun 16, 2016, 9:52 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #47

dasil003 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with everything you said. But it doesn't address why you think secrecy is always necessary.

If you work because you need a job, and your company is transparent, and its in a financially precarious state, why would you stay?

I fail to see what the problem is here.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#108

Post by terrywilcox » Thu, Jun 16, 2016, 9:52 PM UTC

jes wrote: post #86

terrywilcox wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recommend not having children if you're only keeping them as long as it serves your self interest.

I recommend thinking carefully about what is to your long-term self-interest, and then acting accordingly. That would include not creating children if you and your partner are not certain that you want them and will do what is required to raise them in a peaceful, loving and rational home.

I can't explain why you're wrong about kids and self-interest. It's something you have to experience for yourself.

You may have an epiphany about the 50th time you yell "watch out for that car". I swear she _wants_ me to have a heart attack.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#109

Post by k-mcgrady » Thu, Jun 16, 2016, 9:53 PM UTC

I'm curious as to why they had 94 employees. That seems like an insanely high number for a company that does something pretty basic (not dumping on the product, I like it and have used it in the past). What are all of those people doing?

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#110

Post by st3v3r » Thu, Jun 16, 2016, 9:53 PM UTC

antisthenes wrote: post #73

compiler-guy wrote: post #36

This may be a little cynical but: "With our culture of bringing our whole selves to work and seeing team as family, with shared values we live by,..." In the American business world, you are an employee until you aren't. Confusing being an employee with being "family" is a mistake, both for the company and the employee. When times get bad, companies do what it takes to survive, including throwing employees overboard.…

Not only is it not cynical, but should be taught to every college student, regardless of major and specialization in their general business elective class. There is very little overlap between a family (or even a friendship) and a business (unless the business is mandated by law to provide benefits similar to what a family does - which it usually isn't)

Taught to every Junior High student.