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

Cloudflare lays off new hires

i.imgur.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 276 posts

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#141

Post by andsoitis »

el_benhameen wrote: post #128
pc86 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does it matter? If they say they overhired, you have people in here asking why the CEO (or the board) doesn't get fired for that decision. If they say their investors are demanding better returns (e.g. higher stock price, higher profits, wahtever that means for the particular business) you have people in here saying it's greed. There is no answer Cloudflare could give her or anyone else that would make folks go…

In the case of the video, the implication is that she was told she’s being fired for performance, which seems unreasonable as she appears to have just finished training. I think the days of HR giving references with any information are long gone, but I still wouldn’t want to chance having something in my “file” about being let go for performance if that wasn’t the real reason. That and it’s just common decency to not…

> having something in my “file” about being

I would check your assumption here. What is this "my file" you imagine exists. What is it? Who is the custodian? Is there just one copy, if not, how are they kept in sync, etc.?

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#142

Post by two_in_one »

frfl wrote: post #85
irjustin wrote: post #58

Possibly stupid question - why are so many companies laying off? According to Wallstreet, the majority of the recession scare isn't a scare. Inflation, while not fully at target, is getting better. Unemployment is at an all time low. So many companies are laying off like it's the worst times ahead. Obviously layoffs aren't taken lightly so there must be some internal signals that really push them to take these measur…

If you read the layoff threads from the last 24 hours a few common reasons are theorized - Investors pressuring for profits, cut costs (too many people hired during Covid, total salary bill too big to justify right now). One company does it, other companies may be pressured to drive up stock prices - Money is expensive, - Section 174 possibly, companies can't write off entire salaries for engineers as easily to offse…

> Companies following the lead of other companies (CEOs not thinking for themselves, just looking at what others are doing)

Layoff usually negatively affects company's image. It makes sense to do it when everybody's attention is on someone else. Then it looks like nothing special.

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#143

Post by aestetix »

Aurornis wrote: post #140
aestetix wrote: post #84

I don't understand why Cloudflare can't just be honest and say the reason she got laid off, instead of making up some garbage about her performance. That was her main complaint, and I side with her completely. She was not asking to keep her job, or asking unreasonable questions. If they just explained that it was because the company overhired, or because they needed to reduce costs to keep the company afloat, that wo…

> I don't understand why Cloudflare can't just be honest and say the reason she got laid off, instead of making up some garbage about her performance. In the video she says she was hired August 25th, or 4.5 months ago. She also says she hasn't "closed anything officially", or in other words zero sales. I understand this is an emotionally charged topic, but the unfortunate reality is that being past your ramp-up perio…

If that's the case, then they should just say that.

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#144

Post by strix_varius »

dgellow wrote: post #32
Aurornis wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The harder, riskier, and more expensive you make it to hire new people, the more companies will play it safe by avoiding junior hires and putting more headcount in less restrictive countries. A few jobs ago our mobile dev team was in an EU country with significant protections against firing people. Their interview process involved a take-home problem that would have easily taken 80-100 hours, more with polish. I coul…

That doesn’t really pass the smell test. Countries with employment protections still have probation periods during which the company can fire you without hassle. For example in Germany 6 months is a common duration. https://allaboutberlin.com/guides/probezeit If you cannot evaluate an employee’s worth in 6 months that’s pretty problematic.

In a large company, it's more likely for a manager to inherit an employee than to hire them. Often long after this six-month period.

At that point, the manager is just stuck with the net-negative employee.

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#145

Post by acdha »

lgleason wrote: post #88
neom wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yikes on that second link, I seriously hope she told them she was recording the call or she may run into some two-party consent issues.

Her Linkedin says she's in Atlanta. Either way, I doubt she will get severance after that and if Cloudflare wants to make a point they could try to go after her for a violation of the companies NDA/confidentiality she signed when she was hired by recording that and sharing it on the net.

Doing that has a big chance of backfiring from a PR perspectives and I’d be surprised if a good lawyer couldn’t find an argument that the agreement did not extend to bad-faith claims or, depending on whether things like the WARN act apply, illegal acts. I would be surprised if they tried that because as soon as they sue, she’d be able to request a lot of information under discovery and the odds are pretty high that would reveal something which they’d like not to have public. Nuking a former employee with no assets is not worth the NLRB or similar getting interested.

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#146

Post by sys_64738 »

pc_edwin wrote: post #57
sneed_chucker wrote: post #3

I wonder if the US will ever get first-world tier labor laws that prevent companies from screwing people over like this. Doesn't seem likely any time soon, but it's so insane how healthcare and everything is tied to an employer and in most places they can just fire you on a whim and not offer severance or anything.

I would much rather get a risky tech job in the US than in my current country (UK) where we get paid half or even less than half.. Btw its not just the money either, imagine the kind of companies/opportunities that can survive such extreme collectivism and think about what becomes of the culture/practices/mannerisms in such an environment. One thing I always wondered about less developed parts of the world like Asia…

I hated working in Britain with the BS months lying time and getting paid monthly. In the USA you get paid fortnightly or twice monthly and are paid for the period just past.

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#147

Post by ipqk »

tlogan wrote: post #89
whstl wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also interested in the responses to your questions, but I would ask something else: are non-tech companies also doing layoffs? I'm not in the US so I'm not really up to date to that.

The layoffs are widespread. For example, Dominos just laid off 1,200 drivers. However discussions about the economy's health become particularly politicaly charged during an election year. So any conversation about the state of the economy, whether it's perceived as good or bad, inevitably carries political implications in this context. Edit: it is not Dominos it is Pizza Hut https://www.sfgate.com/food/article/pizza…

Are you talking about California based Pizza Huts? If so, they're replacing them with gig workers instead.

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#148

Post by [deleted] »

irjustin wrote: post #58

Possibly stupid question - why are so many companies laying off? According to Wallstreet, the majority of the recession scare isn't a scare. Inflation, while not fully at target, is getting better. Unemployment is at an all time low. So many companies are laying off like it's the worst times ahead. Obviously layoffs aren't taken lightly so there must be some internal signals that really push them to take these measur…

[deleted]

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#149

Post by rdtsc »

sputknick wrote: post #94
irjustin wrote: post #58

Possibly stupid question - why are so many companies laying off? According to Wallstreet, the majority of the recession scare isn't a scare. Inflation, while not fully at target, is getting better. Unemployment is at an all time low. So many companies are laying off like it's the worst times ahead. Obviously layoffs aren't taken lightly so there must be some internal signals that really push them to take these measur…

When it comes to layoffs, no one wants to be the first company to do it, and no one wants to be the last company to do it. Once a few of the industry leaders started doing it, it gave others top-cover to start the process. At this point they need to do the layoffs so if they report bad sales numbers for the quarter they can say "we saw this coming, thats why we did some layoffs alredy. we should be good now". And if…

This is how I see it as well. Many might have wanted to do it, but they didn't want to be the first. As soon as the big ones started doing, even just one or two, the floodgates opened and now everyone can blame it on "everyone else doing it", "it's the environment", "the economic reality", etc.

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#150

Post by SantalBlush »

forward1 wrote: post #69
sneed_chucker wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Employees are equally free to "screw over" companies by terminating their employment at any time; at-will is a two-way street. Wow. I guess that might seem like a convincing argument if you totally ignore the power imbalance between a terminated employee who loses the ability to pay for basic necessities vs a company that loses the labor of a single person.

The inability for an individual to guarantee payment for necessities cannot be the fault of any company. Each capable adult must be held accountable and responsible for themselves in this world.

Of course, even most free-market types don't belive this. After all, we collectively pay for things like national defense because it very obviously makes more economic sense than each individual trying to defend against a foreign adversary.

No, the "Each capable adult must be held accountable and responsible for themselves" is only trotted out against things a free-market ideologue doesn't like. It's a nonsense argument, and they know it.

Post reply on HN