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

Cisco workforce reductions

blogs.cisco.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 351 posts

Re: Cisco workforce reductions

#171

Post by nixass »

truncate wrote: post #129
shell0x wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Or maybe you just aren't that good of an engineer (or whatever profession you are into) and find the easiest group to blame on your failures. I found that people who often are quick to judge and group of people in one bucket based on their color/ethnicity/gender/... are often not that bright people and like to focus on directing it on others. Somewhat like MAGA.

> Somewhat like MAGA.

Wow this escalated quickly. What OP is saying is not anecdotal but true to every major US tech company. You can cope all you want, won't make a difference

Re: Cisco workforce reductions

#173

Post by pnw_throwaway »

renticulous wrote: post #91
33MHz-i486 wrote: post #16

its sickening that these companies making 10s of Billions in profit annually at 60% gross margins are going to throw their employees that got them there under the bus. layoffs are for at risk companies undergoing restructuring not semi-annual financial engineering of your earnings release I’m not a big collective action proponent historically but in the face of this bs, it might be time.

> that got them there under the bus. Do you employ construction workers for lifetime after they have built your house?

Found the corpo cuck

Re: Cisco workforce reductions

#174

Post by atoav »

3D30497420 wrote: post #131
HDBaseT wrote: post #35

"I could not be prouder of the growth you delivered" Note the "you delivered"... --- A few lines later "With this, we are making changes today that will result in the reduction of our overall workforce in Q4 by fewer than 4,000 jobs" Rough, bit on the nose no?

My company just did something like this. We completed a big redesign and the CEO sent an email saying how proud he was of our work. Layoffs started the next week.

By this point I believe people like these should be excluded from all social contracts and reminded at every step that what they did is not ok. Maybe finally a positive use for facial recognition technology?

Re: Cisco workforce reductions

#175

Post by truncate »

Scroll_Swe wrote: post #160
truncate wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe you just aren't that good of an engineer (or whatever profession you are into) and find the easiest group to blame on your failures. I found that people who often are quick to judge and group of people in one bucket based on their color/ethnicity/gender/... are often not that bright people and like to focus on directing it on others. Somewhat like MAGA.

[flagged]

[dead]

Re: Cisco workforce reductions

#176

Post by simonra »

intended wrote: post #154
hirako2000 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Diversity is the term to disguise cheaper labor. Call it women, ethnic minorities, trans, neuro divergent, on wheelchair, or those having criminal records. It's a brilliant slogan, not just because virtue signalling, but because it spawns cross cultural factions, all selfishly united to defend it. At no further brainwashing cost to you. You dare to attack it? You are out. Pack your stuff, and your shame. Consolation?…

Maybe America should export US labour and safety standards. Outsourcers don’t just compete on price, they compete on hours worked, and support given. You do it in outsourcing contracts to a degree, just go further - holidays available, work hours, firing procedures, support and health services. I do know that FDA inspectors travel to factories around the world to ensure they are compliant. You’d remove the incentive…

Please don't export US labour and safety standards. The amount of paid time off is hard to argue is not unethical, the conflation of vacation time and sick time clearly is unethical, the amount of parental leave (especially maternity) is a crime against humanity. The firing procedures are also something you'd expect to read about in a history book besides a picture of a child visibly yearning for the coal mines, contracts with a mutual resignation period giving both parties adequate time to transition is a bare minimum. And that is just the tip of the iceberg. Please please America spend serious efforts developing your labour standards to a humane level instead of exporting them.

Re: Cisco workforce reductions

#177

Post by hirako2000 »

anal_reactor wrote: post #168
hirako2000 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't be embarrassed. Most don't see it, because the moral framing blocks economic analysis. As for learning Hindi, it may help. But don't make the mistake of confusing cultural diversity with competence uniqueness. One expands the number or silos in the labor pool. The other justifies better pay.

My thinking was, the goal of "diversity" is to have people reject their cultural backgrounds and form a shapeless blob that absorbs commands more easily and resists less. Basically "divide and conquer" applied to workplace.

Dividing implies having to preserve, if not reinforce differences.

Of course those difference aren't meant to object the dominant force. They are meant to counter act each others.

I see more push for integration than assimilation in the workplace.

Re: Cisco workforce reductions

#178

Post by asdfsa32 »

Kadecgos wrote: post #90
asdfsa32 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you look at how efficient your local government is?

Yeah - the answer is that the cost to deliver a service from my local government is a lot cheaper than it is when it's coming from the private sector. People meme on 'lol government efficiency', but actually sit down and calculate your marginal cost for the services you pay for that are funded by taxation. It's not even close - the cost to operate these services per person is crazy low. In fact, you don't even have t…

You're making it sound like I am not already paying taxes for those "absorbing of costs".

Re: Cisco workforce reductions

#180

Post by blitzar »

Scroll_Swe wrote: post #169
blitzar wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> companies still need to lay people off... The people who just gave you a 20% increase in profits in a year need to go?

Yes, in a market economy layoffs still needs to happen. What is your option? Companies keep people forever? In what economy does this work? Please ask the Poles, Baltics and Eastern EU, when did their living standards increase? Was it joining EU or communist Soviet?

layoffs at earnings results time never ever need to happen.

in a market economy you layoff people when functions, business, products or roles actually become redundant (or fire for cause / underperformance) rather than waiting potentially months till the end of the financial year to do it in a mass firing.

when you need new headcount, inventory or inputs to your supply chain you don't wait 7 months selling no products to see how full year revenue looks before you decide

if you are managing a team and have poor performers or functions that are no longer necessary, you should bring them up to scratch or manage them out immediately, not wait 11 months till the next eoy layoff round. these stupid layoff rounds promote dysfunctional organisations with bloat and keeping around dead weight or overhiring to sacrifice people at the altar of the consultant / mba / earnings juicing layoff rounds.

Post reply on HN