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

161–170 of 276 posts

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#161

Post by neom »

NicoJuicy wrote: post #51
neom wrote: post #18

Good for her for saying all the quiet parts out loud. Great post. I'm a big Matthew Prince fan, a big CloudFlare fan, and a shareholder. Sadly, this rubs me the wrong way...

Same here ( shares) , this was all mentioned last year around q1 on investor day for improving the sales department and firing underperformers: https://softwarestackinvesting.com/cloudflare-net-q2-2023-ea... section: profitability The idea, a year ago, was to replace underperformers by average performers in sales. That was the first round of layoffs that Cloudflare had and impacted ~ 100 people. The girl in the video…

Hey look... as a shareholder particularly, I have no problem with laying off underperformers in any department, especially sales asap. What rubs me the wrong way is twofold: What the folks laid off are saying about their packages. Specifically healthcare, if it's true it seems particularly cruel, give them 6 months (even if they've only been there a couple). Second, in the video the tiktok woman posted, if it's accurate 3-month ramp into year-end expecting sales for a jr sales person? Come on.

That said, as you mentioned, I don't know the metric at all, and like you, I hope it's fair. :)

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#162

Post by alasdair_ »

verve_rat wrote: post #124
forward1 wrote: post #33

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. That seems like a fair and faithful manifestation of a free market. Health care and insurance is also available without an employer, at least in the US.

Genuine question: Do you think that people in countries with strong labour laws are signing up to be literal slaves?

I used to work in the UK. I once worked for a company that had a salesperson that wanted to quit. He was forced to do a non-sales job for thirty days stacking boxes and sorting old files before he was allowed to leave and he hated every minute of it.

So yes, sometimes strong labor laws have a hint of slavery to them, but certainly not equivalence to real slavery.

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#163

Post by tiew9Vii »

Aurornis wrote: post #151
aestetix wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

They did. They said it was for performance reasons and offered to book a longer, second call to talk about it. Did you watch the video? She cuts them off several seconds into the call and doesn't let them even speak before she starts talking about her situation (hire date, no sales closed). They didn't even have a chance to say anything. Once someone reaches this level of intensity (cutting people off, not allowing t…

> Once someone reaches this level of intensity

Not sure if I watched the same video shared here as you did.

It obviously came as a surprise but she seemed calm given the circumstances and was asking straight direct reasonable questions given the circumstances with the people on the other end responded back with gobbledygook avoiding answering straight direct questions.

In no way was she loud, abusive, threatening. At best she got agitated she wasn’t being given any real answer, just meaningless words avoiding answering a simple direct question.

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#164

Post by jachee »

andsoitis wrote: post #141
el_benhameen wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.?

It’s in quotes because it’s not a literal file, per se. But HR will keep records of termination reasons.

So, if a prospective employer contacts Cloudflare and asks why she was terminated and Cloudflare says “performance” when that’s not actually the case, it’s detrimental to the potential employer’s perception of her.

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#165

Post by hasty_pudding »

declan_roberts wrote: post #102
hasty_pudding wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because in America a job is the difference between life or very dangerous homelessness and death. if we didn't have such shit social safety nets here, it wouldn't be that personal.

Us Silicon Valley engineers are some of the best compensated people in the country, maybe even the world. If she’s living hand to mouth, then the problem isn’t her compensation but something else.

If we are paid so well then why are we still working?

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#166

Post by declan_roberts »

hasty_pudding wrote: post #165
declan_roberts wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Us Silicon Valley engineers are some of the best compensated people in the country, maybe even the world. If she’s living hand to mouth, then the problem isn’t her compensation but something else.

If we are paid so well then why are we still working?

I’d be happy to take a look at your finances and give you some tips.

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#168

Post by neilv »

Looked like the man on the video that aestetix linked [1], of the termination call, was a director. I hope he was one of the people who decided on the layoffs, or decided who would be laid off.

IMHO, the person's manager should've also been on the call, even if it was 100% out of their hands. (Unless the immediate manager was laid off at the same time.) A manager is responsible for the people reporting to them, and this is a failure.

[1] https://www.tiktok.com/@brittanypeachhh/video/73223013131344...

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#169

Post by aestetix »

Aurornis wrote: post #160
aestetix wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not entirely true. She did cut them off when they were giving out corporate speak. She asked for details, and they didn't have any details for her. I would have expected them to have a list of specific reasons, possibly prepared by her manager, and if she wanted to challenge them, then schedule a follow up meeting. But the "follow up meeting" is often just a way to make the complaint go away, rather than addre…

> She did cut them off when they were giving out corporate speak. She cut them off after 21 seconds and then went into a heated complaint, including calling what they're doing "bullshit" > She asked for details, and they didn't have any details for her. Once someone becomes this heated, the only real option is to reschedule a followup call after the person has had time to cool down. Nothing good would have come from…

A few things.

First, if they are doing layoffs, shouldn't they expect people to be pissed off, and be prepared to handle that? I don't think the call was heated at all, but maybe it's a cultural difference. It could be that American corporate drones in general are less tolerant of conflict.

Second, why not include someone she knew on the call, instead of two people she had never met before? It's a total power move. If they had her direct boss included, or started out with a reason why it was just the two of them, that probably would have helped.

Third, the fact that others were getting laid off besides just her tells me that it was not solely a performance issue. It was a corporate level cost saving measure, combined with a performance issue. Had they admitted to that, instead of laying the blame on her, it would have been fine for me. She probably would not have been happy, but I personally would not agree with her posting a video where they said that.

Finally, I'm not sure what this stereotypical "HN commenter" is, but if you bring it up again, I may have to consider that you're not actually trying to engage with my arguments and instead dismissing me as a sockpuppet or something.

Re: Cloudflare lays off new hires

#170

Post by forward1 »

SantalBlush wrote: post #150
forward1 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 argum…

You're welcome to make a counter-argument for why an individual is entitled to something in this world, and I would welcome reading it.
Post reply on HN