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

Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

blogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 284 posts

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#271

Post by ckdarby »

notfromhere wrote: post #248
incrudible wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the evidence suggested that periodic layoffs are good for company longevity and profit margins, you can bet that none of these academics would shout it from the rooftops. Moreover, none of the evidence was collected under the current economic environment, where a decade of cheap money and growth fantasies have fueled an unsustainable hiring frenzy.

It's a social exercise at companies like Microsoft. You lay people off because you are expected to lay people off, hell you'll look irresponsible for not laying people off. We're gonna sit here and pretend that Microsoft, a company that printed $72B in net income last fiscal year somehow needs to lay off 10k workers to survive?

Survive, no. Blackberry is still surviving.

Thrive, yes. It is one of the factors that allowed them over time to get to $72B in net income.

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#272

Post by ckdarby »

Tiktaalik wrote: post #224
KWxIUElW8Xt0tD9 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HP did this back in the 80s also, we were working 9 of 10 days to avoid layoffs

The Ontario government did something like this during the recession in the 80s. There were "Rae Days" a dozen forced unpaid days off for the public service to both save money and jobs, named after the premier of the time, Bob Rae. Rae Days were reviled and helped end the viability of Rae's party the Ontario NDP. The thing is... I don't get it? Would people have rather had mass layoffs? Rae 100% did the right thing he…

Yes. There are always those taking advantage of any system and those being cheated by those taking advantage.

In the above those being cheated are actually hit twice vs if you layoff those trying to take advantage of the system the cheated get double benefits.

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#273

Post by ckdarby »

coldpie wrote: post #92
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why make a profit when you can pay your employees >100% of your revenue and just go into debt instead? It's not how business works. You hire people if you need people, and you pay them the least you can get away with, so you maximize profits - because long ago, you raised money with the promise to the people you raised the money from that you would do this, and you have a Fiduciary obligation to do so...

> you pay them the least you can get away with, so you maximize profits We agree then that employees should put in the least amount of work that they can get away with, right? Fair's fair.

That is what a lot of employees do. That is why these layoffs are probably happening, cutting 5% could have been done by freezing hiring and performance evals.

They're particular individuals who will take a stance like what you're outlining and sit in a limbo state outside of performance firing them. They bring down team moral, high performing employees feel cheated, etc.

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#274

Post by bamboozled »

mistrial9 wrote: post #212
bamboozled wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the arts are being automated too lol

related: book tour by Rebecca Giblin and Cory Doctrow to discuss their new book, Chokepoint Capitalism! -- This conversation will explore a call to action for the creative class and labor movement to rally against the power of Big Tech and Big Media.

I think it's just going to turn people back into farmers and just doing things that are necessary for their survival rather than participating in an economy that no longer gives them a way to provide for themselves, people will just do what is required to get by.

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#276

Post by coldpie »

ckdarby wrote: post #273
coldpie wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you pay them the least you can get away with, so you maximize profits We agree then that employees should put in the least amount of work that they can get away with, right? Fair's fair.

That is what a lot of employees do. That is why these layoffs are probably happening, cutting 5% could have been done by freezing hiring and performance evals. They're particular individuals who will take a stance like what you're outlining and sit in a limbo state outside of performance firing them. They bring down team moral, high performing employees feel cheated, etc.

I think it would be more accurate to say it exposes to the high performers that they are being cheated. Those employees are donating their time & effort to the company so that their bosses can drive fancy cars, fund yacht racing teams, take tourist trips to LEO, buy social media companies to use as toys, and pay off politicians to keep those same employees desperate. The owners want employees fighting amongst themselves for scraps because it keeps them distracted from their real enemy.

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#277

Post by [deleted] »

danans wrote: post #73
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet they are. Even though they could give you nothing, they chose otherwise.

It's not just from the goodness of their hearts. Fundamentally, they chose this approach because those who receive the benefits will have to sign NDAs and because they don't want their reputation as an employer to be poisoned.

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#279

Post by [deleted] »

kypro wrote: post #83
mynameisvlad wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC, Salesforce also did the same thing. Announced layoffs that would happen over the course of a year, with some effective immediately. It feels like it would demoralize workers; everyone was already on eggshells leading up to such an announcement and it would suck to continue working while stepping on eggshells for a full year, wondering if tomorrow is your day.

I've seen both. Imo announcing layoffs ahead of time is better because while demoralising it at least gives people time to prepare and a sense that the company cares enough about you to be honest with you and aid with a smooth transition to your next role. I worked for place which did several mass layoffs. The way they did it was by emailing everyone at end of day Thursday explain that everyone needed to be in the of…

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#280

Post by skinnymuch »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #206
skinnymuch wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have people gotten in trouble for breaking the fiduciary obligation by being nicer to workers? Has any one been in a serious chance for getting in trouble for being nicer to workers? I have always assumed this stuff is basically made up. It might be written somewhere, but no one is enforcing it. It appears to be greed and keeping the status quo.

> Have people gotten in trouble for breaking the fiduciary obligation by being nicer to workers? Has any one been in a serious chance for getting in trouble for being nicer to workers? Being nice to workers, and never returning money to shareholders because you're overpaying your workers are two entirely different things. FAANG has treated their workers quite well for a 10+ years, and shareholders have not cared, bec…

The wages workers get aren’t because of lawsuit threats. I don’t follow that logic?

Compared to unions and socialist ideals, FAANG has treated workers okay because of the arbitrarily high income compared to when the working class gets even more exploited in other industries. Being better than bad situations doesn’t mean a good situation.

Some big tech companies were colluding to keep wages stagnant by not hiring workers at other companies. Wages were lower until the collision was uncovered and companies like Facebook came around and started paying more. Colluding against workers is not treating them well.

Pay and some stock options aren’t the only ways to treat workers better. Capitalism doesn’t have to control every part of why we are nice to other people.

Post reply on HN