Live data from Hacker News

The Broken Microsoft Pact: Layoffs and Performance Management

danielsada.tech

21–30 of 105 posts

Re: The Broken Microsoft Pact: Layoffs and Performance Management

#21
Most financial advisors tell you to keep a rainy day fund with a 3-6 month runway.

Given what's been happening in the tech industry and the economy at large, I now keep a 1-year emergency fund in a money-market fund at 4% (Fidelity SPAXX). I'm probably losing out on some growth (SP500 grew 11% over the past year, despite the massive drop in April 2025), but at least I have liquidity in case I get laid off.

That's the kind of game I feel I have to play these days.

Re: The Broken Microsoft Pact: Layoffs and Performance Management

#22
This overlooks the 2009 and 2014 layoffs and the notorious Mini-Microsoft blog, still up over 15 years later(!), where they were discussed. The notion of a "Microsoft Pact" is absolute baloney but, had there been one, it was broken back then, not anytime recent.

Re: The Broken Microsoft Pact: Layoffs and Performance Management

#23

Google had the same "no layoffs" vibe too, and they paid better. Turns out that everyone is willing to do layoffs.

Still waiting for the Apple shoe to drop. Has Apple just not been as expansionist as these other companies? Or is it still coming?

Apple decided it wanted to be fashionably late to AI so I assume it will also be fashionably late to layoffs too.

Re: The Broken Microsoft Pact: Layoffs and Performance Management

#24
I wish people were not so adverse to unions. The company will never be your friend. You will almost never have much leverage over what the company wants to do. The information you have will most likely be very asymmetrical to what the company has insight into, putting you at a disadvantage. Unions are imperfect. Unions will have its own inside politics. You will pay a union fee.

I think humans are fundamentally flawed in not being able to see alternate history. If they have to pay a union, they will not see all the benefits, and only focus on the 50 dollar union fee.

Re: The Broken Microsoft Pact: Layoffs and Performance Management

#25

This was always a con for suckers. The only ways out are unions and employee-owned co-ops by changing the interests to ensure stability rather than merely being fooled by corporate masters who can always change the deal at any time.

Unions don’t prevent layoffs. You’re bound by a union contract which will include conditions for layoffs. Unions can prevent overwork and burn out. They cannot prevent layoffs.

Unions can't (always) make an unprofitable company profitable, but they can prevent fake layoffs that aren't actually warranted by the company's economic condition, like the kind the article is talking about.

Re: The Broken Microsoft Pact: Layoffs and Performance Management

#27

I never took implicit “they pay less but it’s more chill” culture stories seriously. You can classify certain job functions this way more readily than company wide cultures.

Can't generalize based on one data point but it really was historically low-stress and low-toxicity in every part of the company I've interacted with in the past 8+ years. If it had been combative and high-stress like some of the past places I've worked I wouldn't have considered the inferior compensation acceptable.

Re: The Broken Microsoft Pact: Layoffs and Performance Management

#28
post #21

Most financial advisors tell you to keep a rainy day fund with a 3-6 month runway. Given what's been happening in the tech industry and the economy at large, I now keep a 1-year emergency fund in a money-market fund at 4% (Fidelity SPAXX). I'm probably losing out on some growth (SP500 grew 11% over the past year, despite the massive drop in April 2025), but at least I have liquidity in case I get laid off. That's the…

Same! Still good that you can get 4% on a risk free investment these days

Re: The Broken Microsoft Pact: Layoffs and Performance Management

#29

I wish people were not so adverse to unions. The company will never be your friend. You will almost never have much leverage over what the company wants to do. The information you have will most likely be very asymmetrical to what the company has insight into, putting you at a disadvantage. Unions are imperfect. Unions will have its own inside politics. You will pay a union fee. I think humans are fundamentally flawe…

Software developers have enjoyed decades of high demand for their skills and the companies that hired them have enjoyed decades of an abundance of capital against a low interest rate. You didn't need a union because you had leverage due to the demand for your skills and companies didn't need to be particularly efficient.

This was a time where companies were hiring talented developers just to deny them to their competitors. Nobody was interested in shaking up that status quo by becoming part of a union.

Re: The Broken Microsoft Pact: Layoffs and Performance Management

#30
The notion that layoffs are something new at Microsoft is weird. I joined it in 2009 in the middle of a large layoff, and I've seen several more over the 15 years I've spent working there. E.g. almost 8k people were gone back in 2015.

Nor is it something unique to them. As far as I know, the only large US tech company that didn't do layoffs in the past decade is NVIDIA (their last one was in 2008).

Post reply on HN