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

Silicon Valley layoffs aren’t a cost-cutting measure. They’re a culture reset

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 69 posts

Re: Silicon Valley layoffs aren’t a cost-cutting measure. They’re a culture reset

#31

Post by vineyardmike »

hedora wrote: post #19
gumby wrote: post #16

"Tech is mature and growth is over". I remember that consensus headline from the 1980s.

Yeah. This article is repeating the classic rationale established companies use coming into each downturn: Growth is over forever, so let's burn the seed corn. Fast forward a few years, and a crop of startups (that innovated while the incumbents belt-tightened) blindside previously unassailable monopolies. I find it kind of ironic that they use Facebook and Google as examples in the article. Remember when FB bought t…

> The big question now is: Who is going to dethrone the current rudderless big tech companies, and how will they do it?

Watch who hires all of the laid off tech workers over the next few years.

Re: Silicon Valley layoffs aren’t a cost-cutting measure. They’re a culture reset

#32

Post by IOT_Apprentice »

hobbitstan wrote: post #3

The Silicon Valley culture was aimed at attracting younger talent away from established companies, with childish perks like free food and video games, and a less rigid work structure. But it was never going be sustainable. At the core, the ‘promise’ that these new tech companies alluded to one day had to actually appear. And the slow creep of government regulation was always going to catch up too. I always assumed mo…

No it was to keep them on campus and working. Oracle was doing that to keep butts in seats at work & minimize time going to dry cleaners or even dental appointments. Come early for breakfast and also get fed dinnner along with your long hours—on campus.

Re: Silicon Valley layoffs aren’t a cost-cutting measure. They’re a culture reset

#33

Post by Tarucho »

addisonl wrote: post #6
hobbitstan wrote: post #3

The Silicon Valley culture was aimed at attracting younger talent away from established companies, with childish perks like free food and video games, and a less rigid work structure. But it was never going be sustainable. At the core, the ‘promise’ that these new tech companies alluded to one day had to actually appear. And the slow creep of government regulation was always going to catch up too. I always assumed mo…

> childish perks like free food Ahh yes, food, such a childish thing.

I guess it came as childish because that´s the way those perks were given to us by management. In fact the head of a big studio (around 800 people) I worked on refered to these perks in private as "glitter".

Re: Silicon Valley layoffs aren’t a cost-cutting measure. They’re a culture reset

#34

Post by dahdum »

toss1 wrote: post #4
skyde wrote: post #2

time to start an Union then ?

Yup, this is about reasserting the boss-over-worker structures. The workers were getting to uppity, expecting things like actual work-life balance.

> The workers were getting to uppity, expecting things like actual work-life balance.

Which of these large companies would you say have a poor work-life balance on average? Google, Facebook, Adobe, Microsoft, and others have reputations as rest-and-vest retirement homes. I've heard Netflix can be challenging, along with some parts of Apple, but nothing like startups, investment banking, or big law.

Twitter before Elon was more like "rest" since they were vesting garbage, but he's trying to morph them into Tesla, which does have a terrible reputation for balance.

Re: Silicon Valley layoffs aren’t a cost-cutting measure. They’re a culture reset

#35

Post by skyyler »

crazygringo wrote: post #30
skyyler wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free lunches are childish to you? Paying for food as a captive audience is very mature? I guess I'm glad to be childish :)

Well you could actually very much look at it as childish. The "free" food is obviously paid for by the company with money that could otherwise go to salaries. If everyone got higher salaries and food was charged for, then you could make choices about spending money in the cafeteria or saving money bringing food from home. Adults make choices. By making the decision for you that you'll take the lower salary but get un…

Why are we assuming it would go to salaries? Do budget surpluses normally result in bonuses for rank-and-file employees?

Aren't you still capable of eating something that isn't free?

This line of reasoning makes any workplace perk into an act of infantilisation:

401(k) matching? You mean you let them remove that much agency from your investment planning?

Healthcare? I would prefer to be a big girl and buy my healthcare plan on the open market.

Free parking? I'll decide for myself where to park since I'm an adult.

Nice toilet paper in the bathroom? Do you think I can't provide toiletries for myself? That money could have been salaries.

Re: Silicon Valley layoffs aren’t a cost-cutting measure. They’re a culture reset

#36

Post by alfalfasprout »

dahdum wrote: post #34
toss1 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, this is about reasserting the boss-over-worker structures. The workers were getting to uppity, expecting things like actual work-life balance.

> The workers were getting to uppity, expecting things like actual work-life balance. Which of these large companies would you say have a poor work-life balance on average? Google, Facebook, Adobe, Microsoft, and others have reputations as rest-and-vest retirement homes. I've heard Netflix can be challenging, along with some parts of Apple, but nothing like startups, investment banking, or big law. Twitter before Elo…

Amazon and FB have never been "rest and vest". Honestly google in most teams isn't like that either.

Re: Silicon Valley layoffs aren’t a cost-cutting measure. They’re a culture reset

#38

Post by buildsjets »

skyyler wrote: post #24
hobbitstan wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conveniently dropped the ‘free’ I see. Whenever I interviewed with companies and they mentioned free meals or fridges full of sodas as a perk, that was a red flag. Companies like IBM and Microsoft had on-site cafeterias and coffee shops usually with subsidized pricing and it never came up in in interviews.

Free lunches are childish to you? Paying for food as a captive audience is very mature? I guess I'm glad to be childish :)

TANSTAAFL. There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch. It’s been in the hacker jargon file since the ‘70s, maaaaan.

Re: Silicon Valley layoffs aren’t a cost-cutting measure. They’re a culture reset

#39

Post by ben7799 »

The Facebook/Google crazy level of perks with 3 meals provided very day, dry cleaning, massages, etc.. ? Free alcohol in the office? That stuff can go, and people will have to deal with.

Some of the other stuff like untracked/unlimited PTO (It's never really unlimited) and free coffee and snacks is nice to have.

I'm in my 40s. I started internships in 1996. All this free food and alcohol, etc.. didn't exist till around 2010.

We would have occasional "hey we're working late so we're getting pizza" in the 1990s and 2000s. We would have "hey we're having a BYOB in the cafeteria friday afternoon." Not this constant culture stuff that constantly wasted tons of money. But Coffee has always been free & around.

It does seem like younger workers who have only experienced the current environment have gotten entitled to it. We used to have crunch time and working weekends and all that nonsense and we didn't have the perks. Sometimes the companies ran out of money anyway. Tougher times can kind of suck. But it still makes these jobs great. They always paid really well. You were still sitting in front of a computer and not stuck doing physical labor.

Re: Silicon Valley layoffs aren’t a cost-cutting measure. They’re a culture reset

#40

Post by [deleted] »

skyyler wrote: post #35
crazygringo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well you could actually very much look at it as childish. The "free" food is obviously paid for by the company with money that could otherwise go to salaries. If everyone got higher salaries and food was charged for, then you could make choices about spending money in the cafeteria or saving money bringing food from home. Adults make choices. By making the decision for you that you'll take the lower salary but get un…

Why are we assuming it would go to salaries? Do budget surpluses normally result in bonuses for rank-and-file employees? Aren't you still capable of eating something that isn't free? This line of reasoning makes any workplace perk into an act of infantilisation: 401(k) matching? You mean you let them remove that much agency from your investment planning? Healthcare? I would prefer to be a big girl and buy my healthca…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN