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

Why is every layoff 10-15%?

blog.eladgil.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 263 posts

Re: Why is every layoff 10-15%?

#141

Post by bitcharmer »

deltree7 wrote: post #63
dymk wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

my remote only company is way more productive than my previous in-person company, so there’s the counter anecdote to your anecdote

I'll take any IC or low-level employee's productivity claim with a grain of salt. For a CEO, productivity is at a first order is operating margins. 99% of HNers have no clue how to calculate that (nor have the necessary data).

> 99% of HNers have no clue how to calculate that

This is just plain wrong. In big organizations it's the front line worker and not the CEO that can confidently gauge productivity changes simply because C level bean counters always try to quantify productivity with flawed metrics likes lines of code when most people know it's nonsensical.

Re: Why is every layoff 10-15%?

#142

Post by cmeacham98 »

justahuman74 wrote: post #137
cmeacham98 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elon Musk took on significant debt (i.e. interest payments) when he acquired Twitter, and Twitter was already losing money when he did. It will take significantly more than just liquidating Twitter's assets for him to succeed, he essentially needs to turn Twitter into successful company.

The debts are a choice though, he could just sell other assets if he didn't want that.

So? We're in the timeline where he made that choice, so now he owes those debts and the interest on them. Yes, in theory he could have bought Twitter without going into debt, but he didn't.

Re: Why is every layoff 10-15%?

#143

Post by bitcharmer »

nickstinemates wrote: post #95
bbreier wrote: post #13

> Remote work > Anticipate more mid-size and smaller companies will go back more fully into the office as times get tougher. This will not be one size fits all, but will be an increasing trend. Up to this point in the article, whether you agree or disagree with the points, the author offers some arguments and reasoning supporting each. Here, they simply assert that small and mid-size companies will go into the office…

For our ~200 person company, remote has been more expensive than an office in the financial district, sf, fwiw. Cost of travel for team get togethers/offsites for a distributed team is expensive.

This doesn't seem like you're remote at all

Re: Why is every layoff 10-15%?

#144

Post by eru »

mjevans wrote: post #85
lostcolony wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, Twitter is basically a running case study in what not to do when it comes to acquiring a company successfully, and can't be held up as anything other than "what happens when you do everything wrong". Certainly, it's not a useful example for others, even as a warning, because you can't easily tell what bad actions led to what bad consequences; there are so many of both.

Success might be difficult to define. If this produces the results that are desired by Elon and the investors then it's probably a success from their perspective. I worry if that's the case, it'll be like all the buy out, chop up, and liquidate value takeovers they made movies about.

> I worry if that's the case, it'll be like all the buy out, chop up, and liquidate value takeovers they made movies about.

In general, if a company is worth more when chopped up than alive, it deserves to be chopped up.

Re: Why is every layoff 10-15%?

#145

Post by flippinburgers »

TexanFeller wrote: post #45
UncleOxidant wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He seems to be writing for CEOs. Reading further he seems to figure that CEOs will be able to reassert control of employees by forcing them back to the office since employees are not going to be able to easily jump ship for another job. As CEO now is your opportunity to rethink remote work. You may decide you want to continue as is, or you may want to make changes. You have an opportunity to act. Not that returning t…

> but many CEOs will tend to believe that things will go better with everyone back in the office Many of us SWEs believe the same!

Um many? Not me. Not any of the engineers I have talked to, which makes those who want to return the minority.

Re: Why is every layoff 10-15%?

#146

Post by ilyt »

TexanFeller wrote: post #42
bbreier wrote: post #13

> Remote work > Anticipate more mid-size and smaller companies will go back more fully into the office as times get tougher. This will not be one size fits all, but will be an increasing trend. Up to this point in the article, whether you agree or disagree with the points, the author offers some arguments and reasoning supporting each. Here, they simply assert that small and mid-size companies will go into the office…

Companies will require RTO because it makes employees more productive. I've worked at one small and one large company during the pandemic involuntary WFH. In both cases productivity was noticeably worse, most especially for new employees onboarding remotely. I think WFH a couple days a week makes me more productive due to focus, but I'm unproductive and miserable now when none of my teammates ever come in. We're laug…

I worked in companies where remote worked but the whole structure of collaboration was built to support that. Can't imagine company that worked on site transition easily

Currently working for company where we our team gets together once a week and that part works well, but management is mostly stuck in old ways so sometimes it's weird.

Re: Why is every layoff 10-15%?

#147

Post by ilyt »

nickstinemates wrote: post #95
bbreier wrote: post #13

> Remote work > Anticipate more mid-size and smaller companies will go back more fully into the office as times get tougher. This will not be one size fits all, but will be an increasing trend. Up to this point in the article, whether you agree or disagree with the points, the author offers some arguments and reasoning supporting each. Here, they simply assert that small and mid-size companies will go into the office…

For our ~200 person company, remote has been more expensive than an office in the financial district, sf, fwiw. Cost of travel for team get togethers/offsites for a distributed team is expensive.

That doesn't sound like being remote

Re: Why is every layoff 10-15%?

#148

Post by thfuran »

irrational wrote: post #125
Clent wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many or a few? Most software engineers find themselves most effective in work from home. This breaks in favor at 3:4 or higher. The software engineers that want to work in office are the odd-balls. I am interested in the break down when one factors in whatever concept of '10x developers' -- which do the most productive of us prefer?

I haven’t met any SWE that want to go back to the office. Heck, even my managers manager has said she never wants to go back, and she is a complete extrovert. These developers online that claim they want to go back must be as rare as hen’s teeth.

I recently switched teams from one where all but one other person (who was hired when the office was closed down and would have an inconveniently long commute) works from the office most days to one where I'm the only person who doesn't. So that's about 80% at least partly in office.

Re: Why is every layoff 10-15%?

#149

Post by 55555 »

lostcolony wrote: post #73
grog454 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I suspect you're right, isn't it a little early to conclude the acquisition wasn't successful? Who even knows what successful means in this case?

I didn't conclude it wasn't a 'successful' acquisition. Just a case study of what not to do. Even if it somehow ends up in a place it gets spun as being a success, only Elon fanboys are saying "4d chess! Brilliant!"; anyone with an ounce of sense recognizes how dumb everything about this has been.

You're being downvoted because it's too soon to judge so harshly. You may be just as biased in the opposite direction as the fanboys. There's been a lot of dumbness and silliness involved but it's pretty hard to assume that a random HN commenter is a better businessman than Musk.

Re: Why is every layoff 10-15%?

#150

Post by 55555 »

Kibae wrote: post #14
jasonhansel wrote: post #5

I think Scott Adams figured this out in 2005: https://dilbert.com/strip/2005-06-11

This reminds me of a story I heard about Steve Wozniak's time at HP: They were going to lay off 10% of the staff, but instead they decided to reduce everyone's pay by 10% and give them an extra day off every two weeks.

Conventional management advice -- at least that I've gotten -- is that you cam increase people's salaries, but you can't cut people's salaries. Without a very unique culture, they take it personally and will likely quit. Better to fire underperformers.

Side note: if staff took better to getting their pay cut, they'd get more frequent (faster) raises. When a company is suddenly more profitable, compensation increases lag far behind, as they have to first feel very secure of the higher profit level. After all, if it falls back to normal, they can't cut salaries...

Note: my personal experience is limited to managing a few dozen people and there are surely plenty of exceptions to the advice above.

Post reply on HN