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

Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

hackernoon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 198 posts

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#161

Post by coldtea »

fjsolwmv wrote: post #76
mysterydip wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I once got a call out of the blue that I was being laid off. I had always associated stability with success: as long as I was doing a good job, my job would be secure. That was not the case. It was purely a business decision for them, but I left dazed and wondering what to do. I had always planned job changes on my terms. But it was also freeing in that I now could find opportunities I would've missed. I'm mu…

Perhaps your last employers were dazed when you left.

They still have the power and the money to employ other people.

Which is a different situation that needing to be employed to put food on the table.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#163

Post by taurath »

throwaway82729 wrote: post #103
refurb wrote: post #2

Having been laid off due to downsizing, I think everyone should go through it at least once. Sure, the first time will leave you panic stricken, but you'll come out the other side with a lot more clarity about the employee-employer relationship. You are disposable. Even the CEO is disposable (as I've seen many times). Once you realize that, you'll stop the BS about loyalty to your company. It's a business arrangement…

I was laid off once. Got a call from my VP when I was on my vacation. It was an extremely painful experience since I had been repeatedly told that I was a good performer and was critical to the team. I used that as an opportunity to reevaluate how I was operating and swore to make myself as valuable as possible. Also, I started keenly observing how the business was doing and jumped before layoffs happened. Today, I'm…

> I used that as an opportunity to reevaluate how I was operating and swore to make myself as valuable as possible

Isn't that just doubling down on what you were doing before, being a "good performer" and "critical" to the team? The problem is that external forces (to you, your team, division, or your company) can come in at any time and make people change the calculus to want to pay you. And there's nothing stopping them from pulling the trigger, and suddenly you're out of work. We do not have a system designed to help you, we have systems designed to save companies money. The only real solution is to constantly make sure you could move if you had to, and that you're marketable. Part of my newbie years were spent at a big company watching very competent but experienced people get the axe and be replaced by 2-3 new hires - sometimes its not even about the money they'll save.

Then, when you're out checking whether you're marketable, you can do regular checks to see if you really want to stay where you are.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#164

Post by taurath »

trhway wrote: post #48
seattle_spring wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's hilarious that you think Seattle is some backwater tech nowhere with only 2 companies.

or putting it in numbers : 530K vs. 130K (with 40K being employed at AMZN/Seattle and 40K at MS/Seattle) - "Information" at https://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.ca.htm https://www.bls.gov/regions/west/washington.htm#eag as i said, the next best. Compare the scenarios: - a 10%, 4K layoff from AMZN would present a high, by tech standards, unemployment situation of 4% (4K / 90K of the rest of tech capacity in WA with almost half…

We have a 4% unemployment rate locally and there are signs everywhere for all sorts of jobs - its pretty damn good. Most common complaint of any company in Seattle is they can't find enough people to hire. Even a 4k layoff would easily get absorbed (though at different rates, and many would probably get worse pay, since AMZN is at the top of the pay scale here).

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#165

Post by aliencat »

refurb wrote: post #2

Having been laid off due to downsizing, I think everyone should go through it at least once. Sure, the first time will leave you panic stricken, but you'll come out the other side with a lot more clarity about the employee-employer relationship. You are disposable. Even the CEO is disposable (as I've seen many times). Once you realize that, you'll stop the BS about loyalty to your company. It's a business arrangement…

Well put. I realized that when my boss compared me to a pigeon taking a shit on the company when I am quitting. Clearly, all the "I want my employee to be happy here" talk is just BS and only fools geeks that are naive enough to believe it and actually work their ass off.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#166

Post by DubiousPusher »

pm90 wrote: post #79
gojomo wrote: post #52

Author is 22 years old, and was not laid off. But, because some peers were – from Snap, a boom-times high-flyer – he's now facing a crisis-of-confidence, first in himself, and then in what feelings of security might be available from reaching "[t]he upper middle-class, the professional class, that venerable example of American wealth and mobility". Well, of course working for a single hot company at 22 doesn't mean y…

I kinda agree. The author does sound like he's basically still living in the school mentality: I do X amount of work and expect Y benefits, no matter what the economy or market is like. This seems to be his first experience with external factors almost getting to him which made him think that the world may not be so fair after all. Surprise, surprise...

Seems to be the author's awakening to that reality. I think that makes sense. Money provides you guardrails akin to the guardrails institutions like school provide.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#167

Post by DubiousPusher »

gojomo wrote: post #52

Author is 22 years old, and was not laid off. But, because some peers were – from Snap, a boom-times high-flyer – he's now facing a crisis-of-confidence, first in himself, and then in what feelings of security might be available from reaching "[t]he upper middle-class, the professional class, that venerable example of American wealth and mobility". Well, of course working for a single hot company at 22 doesn't mean y…

I don't exactly see a crisis of confidence. This just seems to be the first time this kid has bumped up against the real world. We were all young and naive once and sooner or later got a gut punch or two from the universe. Some people take whatever they get and use it to reinforce their world view. This person seems to have used a new realization to adjust their world view. Maybe their a little older than normal to be groking this for the first time but that's no reason to condescend.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#168

Post by ericd »

eeZah7Ux wrote: post #95
taurath wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In those terms, its usually a hit to reputation, though in general its RARE that a "reputation" hit will prevent an ex-CEO from getting another CEO job, but usually means they won't get a "better" CEO/Executive position. Likewise, if you're working at a company (Facebook say) that has a scandal, get laid off, you're probably gonna be able to find another job.

CEO are forgiven by the job market even when they run out of a failing company while taking a big bonus.

Would you want to be the CEO of a large corporation? The money is great, which everyone who isn't a CEO always seems to want to complain about, but there is very little work-life balance there, and a huge amount of pressure. And you still have a boss, in the form of the board, and very aggressive, possibly unrealistic milestones to hit. And thousands of employees depending on your decisions, along with many millions of shareholders directly and indirectly via their retirement plans.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#169

Post by kridsdale1 »

mywittyname wrote: post #141
toephu2 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even Steve Jobs is disposable. How many here remember where they were and what they were doing when they heard Steve Jobs passed away? Almost like being able to recall where you were when 9/11 happened. When I heard of his death I was shocked, I wondered how Apple would survive, how the world for that matter would move on? But sure enough the next day the sun still rose and and the earth still rotated. Today Apple is…

> Almost like being able to recall where you were when 9/11 happened. Is this sarcasm that I'm not picking up on? I literally can't remember what year SJ died. I can't even remember what generation iPhone was his last.

I remember the precise moment because on that day I was in my office at 1 Infinite Loop in Cupertino. It was bizarre. A mass of mourners swamped the building in under an hour.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#170

Post by sizzzzlerz »

Rafuino wrote: post #109
sizzzzlerz wrote: post #40

I just passed my 40th anniversary since college working in the valley. I've worked for 3 companies, the current one I'm in my 26th year. Although all 3 companies had one or more periods of downsizing, I was never a part of any of them but I did have to suffer colleagues and friends leaving because of them. It's no more fun for those who are left than for those who are shown the door. The lesson learned from that is y…

Congrats! What do you think about the seemingly more common approach for newer grads to work 2-4 years per job and then move on? I hear MBA grads on average stay in their first job ~18 months. It's around the same length for software engineer jobs: https://deeptalent.com/blog/tenure-length-tech-titans-compar... . Where I work now longevity is highly valued, and I think leadership is disconnected with the reality of t…

Not having done that, I can't speak from experience but it really is an individual decision. My first job was 6-1/2 years, the second, 9. I chose to stay because I liked what I was doing and the people I worked with, the work was nationally important (contracts with the intelligence community), I was very well paid compared to peers (according to surveys I read), and the benefits were top-notch. And, to be complete, I really hate interviewing and starting out at the ground floor in new jobs.

Keep in mind, this is me. Your mileage may vary.

Post reply on HN