Salesforce will lay off 10% of staff as part of restructuring • Hacker News Board

Re: Salesforce will lay off 10% of staff as part of restructuring

#281

Post by chucksmash » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 7:45 PM UTC

dantheman wrote: post #244

chucksmash wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the answer to "am I likely to have to lay this person off soon?" isn't "probably not" then it's good that the company becomes more circumspect in hiring. The other side of the token is that such a guarantee would help convince more people to accept an offer. I'd personally be hesitant to switch to a less stable job right now, and getting an offer yanked or immediately laid off with minimal severance would be bruta…

Why do you want to make it harder for people to get hired?

I've laid out my thinking above, which part was unclear?

Many people taking a job are leaving some other job or passing up on other offers to do so. Imposing a cost on employers when they pull a "whoopsie daisy" and rescind offers or immediately lay off a new employee seems like a reasonable trade off to me.

Re: Salesforce will lay off 10% of staff as part of restructuring

#282

Post by tibbydudeza » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 7:54 PM UTC

tiffanyh wrote: post #105

steveBK123 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Co-heads is always a subtext for executive disfunction. I don't think I've ever heard of it working out long term at any level from division co-head to co-CEO. It's also fascinating the opposite direction is also allowed to persist - the guy who is CEO of 4 companies at once. As a lowly high income IC, I am prohibited from almost any outside business activity and in some cases forced to divest when joining a new firm…

> Co-heads is always a subtext for executive disfunction It's actually worked quite well at Oracle over the decades. Benioff, who is former Oracle, hasn't perfected it like Larry has.

SAP tried the co-CEO thing but Jennifer Morgan was gone in a year - suspect her not being based in Waldorf or familiar with Hasso.

Re: Salesforce will lay off 10% of staff as part of restructuring

#283

Post by mrguyorama » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 7:55 PM UTC

downrightmike wrote: post #212

bushbaba wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get ready for assisted living and nursing salary to double. There’s already a shortage.

It'll just melt sideways, the owners will drain elderly for every penny and then ship them off to a medicare facility once they are poor.

This is already happening. Elder care facilities build themselves in the middle of expensive cities, charge $12k a month for negligible care, and once you have no more estate to suck down and take ownership of, they send you to a third rate facility and charge the government, still absurd fees, but at least less stupid.

I conspiratorially believe this is an intentional move to limit wealth transferring from boomers to younger generations as it normally would in the past, by houses being passed down and grandma dying and leaving stuff to youngins, because now all that is taken by "old age homes" instead of the younger generations.

Re: Salesforce will lay off 10% of staff as part of restructuring

#284

Post by bajirao » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 7:56 PM UTC

ubertaco wrote: post #242

gedy wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I really don't understand that style of "leadership". I'm no CEO, but even a simple blow off like this would be more effective: "I know everyone has a lot of questions and concerns about the recent layoffs, but since emotions are strong right now, we'll collect these and discuss them next time"

Salesforce operates in a "zero-trust" environment, in that employees should place zero trust in the company, and the company places zero trust in the employees. It's just modern security practices! /s

Whereas _every_ internal Salesforce townhall type meeting starts with 'Trust is our #1 value'.

Re: Salesforce will lay off 10% of staff as part of restructuring

#285

Post by shtopointo » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 7:57 PM UTC

mensetmanusman wrote: post #57

There are over two jobs open for every layoff. People haven’t realized how crazy the labor market is about to get with a collapsing workforce population over the next many decades.

Comparable jobs (i.e. a software job for a software layoff) or just jobs (lots of server positions out there)?

Re: Salesforce will lay off 10% of staff as part of restructuring

#286

Post by tibbydudeza » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 7:58 PM UTC

cookieswumchorr wrote: post #77

xeromal wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10% is about the number you can layoff without causing a route.

The Romans knew what they were doing :)

There is also "Muskification" as seen at Twitter.

Re: Salesforce will lay off 10% of staff as part of restructuring

#287

Post by tibbydudeza » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 8:00 PM UTC

jeromegv wrote: post #118

rwaksmunski wrote: post #21

How about their future prospects? From the 4 implementations I've seen all are desperately trying to leave the platform. One succeeded so far. Is the enterprise Salesforce craze over?

They have hundreds of thousands of customers and been growing for more than a decade, I don't think you can imply a lot from the 4 implementations you've seen.

VWAG is switching to Salesforce for CRM (ex-SAP) - really can't blame them to be honest.

Re: Salesforce will lay off 10% of staff as part of restructuring

#288

Post by unixhero » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 8:04 PM UTC

atraac wrote: post #223

unixhero wrote: post #214

Used to implement Salesforce for companies. Loved it, end users and customer mostly loved it.

Is this sarcasm? Because my(and everyone I know) experience is absolutely opposite. Salesforce is a shitshow of old pseudo-Java and pseudo-SQL that lack features and proper support. It lock everything behind rate-limits that require you to swipe company credit card to achieve anything. It's slow(both UI and as a development process), hard to work with, INSANELY expensive, most issues are never resolved, or even answe…

We didn't go that deep, so the legaxy spaghetti didn't hit us.

The client was filthy rich and needed to transform core business processes.

Time to market on changes we wanted was nearly always "before lunch". And anything custom we were able to do too.

Re: Salesforce will lay off 10% of staff as part of restructuring

#289

Post by ghaff » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 8:05 PM UTC

andsoitis wrote: post #167

yojo wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even with co-founders, one of you is still the CEO. You need an executive function to set direction and unblock stupid territory squabbles. Someone whose decisions are final. If you have two actual CEOs, you don’t have that.

HBR has an interesting, recent article about why, in some cases, it might be better to have two CEOs: https://hbr.org/2022/07/is-it-time-to-consider-co-ceos

Good read.

The one time I've seen this situation has been as a board member of a small non-profit. This was ages ago but, as I recall, there were two well-qualified candidates for an editor-in-chief position. It seemed a case where if we appointed one, the other would walk. So we made them co-editors and it didn't go well.

But I can imagine circumstances when it can work with the right people and circumstances.

Re: Salesforce will lay off 10% of staff as part of restructuring

#290

Post by orangecat » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 8:12 PM UTC

alistairSH wrote: post #266

BurningFrog wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like it. Employment should be easy to find, switch and end. More like dating than marriage.

Sure, if we roll out some sort of socialized medical coverage. At least for my family, stability of medical coverage is a major impediment to changing jobs.

I continue to not understand the position that the default provider of health insurance has to be either your employer or the government. What makes it fundamentally different from housing, food, or transportation, where you just pay money and there's assistance for people who can't afford it?