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

LinkedIn laying off nearly 700, mostly from core engineering teams

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 294 posts

Re: LinkedIn laying off nearly 700, mostly from core engineering teams

#211

Post by bogtog »

catlover76 wrote: post #196
fullshark wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LeBron James is also underpaid, at least his NBA salary. That's why he chose his team based on whatever would be best for his "brand" so he could make real money.

> LeBron James is also underpaid, at least his NBA salary. By what logic?

The NBA has a cap on how much each player can make (around $50M this year). Lebron could be, say, worth $100M/yr, yet they can't be paid this. I'm guessing that there are around a dozen players in the league worth more than the max salary.

Re: LinkedIn laying off nearly 700, mostly from core engineering teams

#212

Post by kozikow »

tannedNerd wrote: post #5
LewisVerstappen wrote: post #3

> LinkedIn is now ramping up hiring in India, according the person familiar. So, laying off people in the US and hiring in India?

I feel like if US companies are proven to off shore jobs they should take a massive tax hit the same year. Like you are required to pay 5 years worth of the salary of the job you off shored into unemployment or retraining funds.

That would be very easy to circumvent.

You can describe effectively the same software engineering job in a way that sounds completely different. "close a project" of the old team, etc.

Re: LinkedIn laying off nearly 700, mostly from core engineering teams

#213

Post by JumpCrisscross »

LapsangGuzzler wrote: post #195
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s difficult to see unions as anything but a failed model. What they advocate for, workers’ rights, is noble. But the divisiveness they employ makes them a political distraction. We need workers’ rights in law for everyone. Not just those who are in a union.

> But the divisiveness they employ makes them a political distraction. We need workers’ rights in law for everyone. Not just those who are in a union. And how do you propose we align around such things? It seems like you’d need to organize your labor pool and possibly position yourself to bargain collectively, perhaps?

> how do you propose we align around such things?

For one, get tech workers to vote. Ironic detachment from politics still appears to be a thing for many in our industry. After that, this is political organization 101. For all the tech unions we do have, I haven't seen them try to expand workers' rights broadly. Because why would they. That's the competition.

Re: LinkedIn laying off nearly 700, mostly from core engineering teams

#214

Post by postmodest »

LapsangGuzzler wrote: post #195
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s difficult to see unions as anything but a failed model. What they advocate for, workers’ rights, is noble. But the divisiveness they employ makes them a political distraction. We need workers’ rights in law for everyone. Not just those who are in a union.

> But the divisiveness they employ makes them a political distraction. We need workers’ rights in law for everyone. Not just those who are in a union. And how do you propose we align around such things? It seems like you’d need to organize your labor pool and possibly position yourself to bargain collectively, perhaps?

No no, you see, all bureaucracy is evil, and thus organized collections of workers-- necessitating an organizational bureau --is evil.

If you read my magnum opus, Chronos Shuffled, you would see that individual negotiation by an enlightened majority will reach the same common goal if... um... everyone individually pursues the exact same agreed upon goals...

...shit.

Re: LinkedIn laying off nearly 700, mostly from core engineering teams

#215

Post by layer8 »

rocgf wrote: post #53
paxys wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is anyone really surprised? Did you think the end result of the WFH movement was going to be companies continuing to pay you to live out of your Bay Area house?

Anecdotally, in my circles, most truly thought that this won't have an impact in the compensation levels. Always struck me as incredibly short-sighted and your comment is actually the first I see that explicitly states what I thought as well. There is still an argument that, if you truly want top talent, then that top talent might actually want to live in high COL locations like NY or whatever.

Might want, yes, but there is probably more top talent in the world than available housing in those high COL locations.

Re: LinkedIn laying off nearly 700, mostly from core engineering teams

#216

Post by alistairSH »

fullshark wrote: post #184
slg wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this is said in jest, but I just want to remind people there is no such thing as being too valuable to be a member of a union. LeBron James is in a union. Tom Cruise is literally striking right now as part of the SAG-AFTRA union strike. Unless John Carmack happens to be reading this, I guarantee you are not close to being as valuable an engineer as LeBron is a basketball player or Cruise is an actor.

LeBron James is also underpaid, at least his NBA salary. That's why he chose his team based on whatever would be best for his "brand" so he could make real money.

He has the third highest annualized salary in the league, at $47.6 million. Curry is the highest paid at $52. Durant is second at $47.65.

He's definitely been underpaid in the past, but I'm not seeing it in his current contract.

Re: LinkedIn laying off nearly 700, mostly from core engineering teams

#217

Post by hitekker »

slg wrote: post #176
pandaman wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It is much harder in Hollywood than in the NBA Can you expand on this, what is "harder" exactly? They don't enjoy the benefits of the union or they cannot get high paying roles? Also, are you implying Jon Voight is not a SAG member, if so, I'd like to see your sources because from what I can find he is a member while being in dispute with it (also shows how great the unions are). And as far as NBA goes, not being a…

The unions have power in the industry and they work to maintain that power. That includes trying to establish rules making it difficult for union members to work non-union gigs and vice versa. This gives incentives for studios to make their productions union jobs which strengthens the union. An actor who refuses to join the union will have a harder time getting work because people generally don't want to deal with th…

This response is thoughtful, but I'm not sure why you're bothering. The other guy is playing the lazy "just asking questions" game.

Re: LinkedIn laying off nearly 700, mostly from core engineering teams

#218

Post by aeyes »

coldpie wrote: post #4

Good news for those 700: because we don't have tech worker unions, they are able to individually bargain the terms of their layoff! ...right?

I have worked for companies with tech unions. You can only negotiate the terms ahead of time because as a union you don't get a heads up before a mass layoff. The terms I saw were usually not that good. Usually they only had severance pay linked to years of service with a cap at 5. In some places that's barely more than the local law requires.

On my own I have been able to negotiate stock as well. Unions won't touch that.

Re: LinkedIn laying off nearly 700, mostly from core engineering teams

#219

Post by 0cf8612b2e1e »

stfp wrote: post #153

> For those who are directly affected by these changes, you will receive a calendar invitation within the next hour Is it just me or does this suck a lot? Thousands of people unsure about their fate, refreshing their calendar, checking for... the lack of an invite? So much added stress and anxiety. Surely they could send two versions of the email, specifying to each person if they are affected or not.

At least there was a timeline. Last layoff at my company said invitations would be sent later today. No timeline on when. So people were sitting around all day wondering if they still had a job.

Re: LinkedIn laying off nearly 700, mostly from core engineering teams

#220

Post by JumpCrisscross »

postmodest wrote: post #214
LapsangGuzzler wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the divisiveness they employ makes them a political distraction. We need workers’ rights in law for everyone. Not just those who are in a union. And how do you propose we align around such things? It seems like you’d need to organize your labor pool and possibly position yourself to bargain collectively, perhaps?

No no, you see, all bureaucracy is evil, and thus organized collections of workers-- necessitating an organizational bureau --is evil. If you read my magnum opus, Chronos Shuffled, you would see that individual negotiation by an enlightened majority will reach the same common goal if... um... everyone individually pursues the exact same agreed upon goals... ...shit.

> all bureaucracy is evil, and thus organized collections of workers-- necessitating an organizational bureau --is evil

This is the distraction I'm talking about. Unions, in this century, have been effective at one thing: dividing voters from organizing around labor reforms in law.

Post reply on HN