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

Layoffs Are Cruel and Don't Work

matduggan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 279 posts

Re: Layoffs Are Cruel and Don't Work

#171

Post by raincom »

tomnipotent wrote: post #29
oconnore wrote: post #17

This is incredibly dumb. > The downsized companies, however, were outperformed consistently by the nondownsized ones during the initial two years following the downsizing. Can you think of any confounding factors in this analysis? How do you control for important factors like, say: whether the board is in enough financial trouble to downsize ?

Don't forget the next bit, "by the third year, these differences became statistically nonsignificant". So the layoffs... worked?

Layoffs are indifferent to outcomes by the third year.

Re: Layoffs Are Cruel and Don't Work

#172

Post by bradleyjg »

zug_zug wrote: post #47
bradleyjg wrote: post #6

This place isn't your home, these people aren't your friends and your executive leadership would run you over with their cars if you stood between them and revenue growth. Your relationship to work changes forever. You will never again believe that you are "critical" to the company or that the company is interested in you as a person. This has always always been the case. Grow up.

This is true, but I think it's misplaced to bitterly place this on the individual. I have worked at multiple companies than have disingenously referred to themselves as "family," always talking about "supporting your growth here," etc. It's just outright dishonest and for whatever reason it's the industry standard. Can't blame people for taking it at face value for a few years. And honestly, one generation ago (and i…

Four years of high school and at least four years of college, both generally requiring courses in history and literature. Sometimes also psychology, philosophy, rhetoric, and/or logic.

On paper these are extremely well educated people from top institutions that boast about producing well rounded individuals.

What happened?

Re: Layoffs Are Cruel and Don't Work

#173

Post by sangnoir »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #157
jeffwask wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two different contexts around layoffs. 1) The company is struggling, losing money, etc and needs to tackle corrective action before everyone loses their jobs. 2) The company is generating record revenues, profits are high, but growth will be 4% instead of 5% so we need layoffs. There seem to be a staggering number of layoffs from camp two. > But it's weird to see all of these think pieces implying that once…

> " Is anyone really going to miss that $4 billion? " Yes, the people who own the company will, i.e. shareholders. The majority are not some cartoonish greedy fatcats either; they're ordinary people like you and I who have retirement investments in stocks and mutual funds. Moreover, if you think employees at FAANGs and big tech companies aren't on-board with this laser focus on share price, remember that a big, big c…

> Moreover, if you think employees at FAANGs and big tech companies aren't on-board with this laser focus on share price, remember that a big, big chunk of their compensation is in equity...

The magnifies the short-termism problem, as employees - like In 'n Out investors - prefer winning battles in the short term, even at the cost of losing the war since they won't stick around the losing side beyond their vesting period.

Re: Layoffs Are Cruel and Don't Work

#174

Post by mrep »

ilostmyshoes wrote: post #126
skee8383 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually there are different levels of working class. A guy earning $18k per year working in retail isn't exactly in the same boat as the manager of the store making $80k a year.

That was a story made up by capital owners to keep the working class fighting amongst itself. The reality is that anyone who works for a wage is being taken advantage of

I have > 500k net worth which using the 4% rule gives me 20k a year but I still work. Am I a capitol owner or working class?

Re: Layoffs Are Cruel and Don't Work

#175

Post by sangnoir »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #39
dougmwne wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. Nearly everyone I know left college doe-eyed and ready to dedicate a piece of their soul to their shiny new job. Everyone learned otherwise one person at a time. Some worked for “we’re all a family” companies and were able to remain innocent ignorants till the day the axe fell.

> Absolutely. Nearly everyone I know left college doe-eyed and ready to dedicate a piece of their soul to their shiny new job When did you graduate college? In the social media era, the sentiment has been more about "fuck you, pay me" and "H.R. is not your friend" type ideology. This is especially true in recent years, where a lot of college graduates have been exposed to years of /r/antiwork in their daily Reddit br…

> It can take a while to convince some of these new hires that as their manager, I'm a person too.

However the company is not a person - RMoney be damned

Re: Layoffs Are Cruel and Don't Work

#176

Post by ilostmyshoes »

mrep wrote: post #174
ilostmyshoes wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was a story made up by capital owners to keep the working class fighting amongst itself. The reality is that anyone who works for a wage is being taken advantage of

I have > 500k net worth which using the 4% rule gives me 20k a year but I still work. Am I a capitol owner or working class?

If you can quit your job and live purely off your investments then you are a capital owner, if you cannot do that without adjusting your lifestyle you're working class

Re: Layoffs Are Cruel and Don't Work

#177

Post by ricardobeat »

oconnore wrote: post #17

This is incredibly dumb. > The downsized companies, however, were outperformed consistently by the nondownsized ones during the initial two years following the downsizing. Can you think of any confounding factors in this analysis? How do you control for important factors like, say: whether the board is in enough financial trouble to downsize ?

You’re assuming downsizing is a consequence of financial trouble. It has not been the case for almost every layoff that happened recently.

Re: Layoffs Are Cruel and Don't Work

#178

Post by sangnoir »

actionablefiber wrote: post #71
bradleyjg wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trying to make it about capitalism is also silly. Those rant and rave about that have no alternative to offer. At best they suggest Scandavian style welfare capitalism, which has capitalism right there in the name, but call it socialism because it sounds cooler. They should grow up too.

Hot take but I think everyone is allowed to recognize the cutthroat, impersonal nature of corporate hiring and firing and commiserate about it without needing to walk around with a fully-formed proposal for an alternative economic system in their pocket.

I may try out gp's approach with the next adverse code review I get: "While my naming is generic and the code difficult to understand - it is the best solution to date. Stop whining and provide your alternative diff before I can take your criticism seriously"

Re: Layoffs Are Cruel and Don't Work

#179

Post by ricardobeat »

bradleyjg wrote: post #6

This place isn't your home, these people aren't your friends and your executive leadership would run you over with their cars if you stood between them and revenue growth. Your relationship to work changes forever. You will never again believe that you are "critical" to the company or that the company is interested in you as a person. This has always always been the case. Grow up.

Deriding the need to belong and do meaningful work is quite cynical and… immature.

Not everyone is in a situation where the only option is to harden their shell and submit to a corporation. Some will find a family or great friends at work. It might mean limiting your career choices, but it is not a character flaw.

Re: Layoffs Are Cruel and Don't Work

#180

Post by musicale »

dougmwne wrote: post #22
mattikus wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're being a bit uncharitable and jaded here. For many, events like these are actually the catalyst that causes one to "grow up", which is what the author is conveying.

Absolutely. Nearly everyone I know left college doe-eyed and ready to dedicate a piece of their soul to their shiny new job. Everyone learned otherwise one person at a time. Some worked for “we’re all a family” companies and were able to remain innocent ignorants till the day the axe fell.

> "we’re all a family"

... that's why our valued Craptech employees should not be surprised if they are subject to abuse, estrangement, abandonment, financial hardship, mistreatment in care homes, abortion or termination of life support, etc., concurrent with our expectation of absolute loyalty at the expense of happiness, health, and sanity. And of course our gender pay policies are modeled on domestic work.

Post reply on HN