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

Layoffs are down, but employers are still finding ways to cut jobs

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 56 posts

Re: Layoffs are down, but employers are still finding ways to cut jobs

#31

Post by snkline »

mvdtnz wrote: post #27
lotsofpulp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of W-2 jobs are simple pay per hour or per year, nothing more. There is not even a need for HR, there are no benefits, just a small business where the owner might run everything. Even if you do have benefits, I doubt the local hotel/restaurant/spa/doctors office/etc is going through a formal layoff process with severance. Probably not even all the outsourcing companies that Apple/Microsoft/Meta/etc use for tech…

I have no idea what a "W-2 job" is. In my country, and most countries, it doesn't matter if you're paid by the hour, by the "year" (what?), salaried etc. Virtually every employee has an employment contract, and every employee without an explicit employment contract (which is illegal) has an implied employment contract.

In the US, implied employment contracts are "at-will". This means the employer may fire an employee for any reason (except reasons that explicitly break a law, like firing a black employee for being black). Likewise, an employee can quit at any time, with no recourse for the employer (2-weeks notice is a custom, not a contractual obligation under at-will employment).

Re: Layoffs are down, but employers are still finding ways to cut jobs

#32

Post by BigRedDog1669 »

gymbeaux wrote: post #22

People like the gentleman in the article are PART OF THE PROBLEM, because they (and it seems most people) seem to have a certain benevolence towards their employer (and US capitalism) no matter how hard they’re fucked by it. He was reassigned to sales, it took a toll on his mental health, but hey no hard feelings because now he’s in a role he enjoys at IBM. The message to IBM is that they can get away with it and thi…

Why not do it then rather than shaming others for not doing it?

Re: Layoffs are down, but employers are still finding ways to cut jobs

#33

Post by aylmao »

This isn't new, right? I've heard it's especially prevalent for management positions, both because the severance would be higher, and because it's "better for office politics" to slowly push someone out, or have the official story be that they left, than to fire someone with power and followers.

Re: Layoffs are down, but employers are still finding ways to cut jobs

#34

Post by wkat4242 »

nradov wrote: post #29
wkat4242 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you have immediate better employment options, take them without doing your old company any favors. Not sure about the US but here in Europe that's a very bad idea. If you change jobs willingly you give up your "seniority" meaning if your next job lays you off you will get no severance and also lower unemployment benefits. So caving in you would give up a huge chunk of social security. If you have a mortgage in p…

Wow that's really terrible advice. If you see a good opportunity then jump on it and don't look back. Otherwise your career will stagnate and you'll eventually get stuck somewhere with no growth potential. As for paying your mortgage, anyone working in a volatile field such as tech should prioritize saving up several months of living expenses. You have to assume that on any given day your employer might get destroyed…

That's a very US centric view IMO. Here the companies stick around longer. We don't do that survival of the fittest mindset here.

And with the ridiculous house prices and crap wages even in tech it's not really possible to save anymore. I'd take social security over anything.

My accrued benefits are something I am entitled to and I worked hard for and I wouldn't drop them without a fight.

Re: Layoffs are down, but employers are still finding ways to cut jobs

#35

Post by FetusP »

mvdtnz wrote: post #27
lotsofpulp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of W-2 jobs are simple pay per hour or per year, nothing more. There is not even a need for HR, there are no benefits, just a small business where the owner might run everything. Even if you do have benefits, I doubt the local hotel/restaurant/spa/doctors office/etc is going through a formal layoff process with severance. Probably not even all the outsourcing companies that Apple/Microsoft/Meta/etc use for tech…

I have no idea what a "W-2 job" is. In my country, and most countries, it doesn't matter if you're paid by the hour, by the "year" (what?), salaried etc. Virtually every employee has an employment contract, and every employee without an explicit employment contract (which is illegal) has an implied employment contract.

I just want to throw out that "paid by the year" has not been a common thing in my American experience. I've never heard of anyone with that.

Unless they are talking about a yearly salary.

Re: Layoffs are down, but employers are still finding ways to cut jobs

#36

Post by lotsofpulp »

FetusP wrote: post #35
mvdtnz wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea what a "W-2 job" is. In my country, and most countries, it doesn't matter if you're paid by the hour, by the "year" (what?), salaried etc. Virtually every employee has an employment contract, and every employee without an explicit employment contract (which is illegal) has an implied employment contract.

I just want to throw out that "paid by the year" has not been a common thing in my American experience. I've never heard of anyone with that. Unless they are talking about a yearly salary.

Yes, I meant yearly salary.

Re: Layoffs are down, but employers are still finding ways to cut jobs

#37

Post by Gibbon1 »

mvdtnz wrote: post #27
lotsofpulp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of W-2 jobs are simple pay per hour or per year, nothing more. There is not even a need for HR, there are no benefits, just a small business where the owner might run everything. Even if you do have benefits, I doubt the local hotel/restaurant/spa/doctors office/etc is going through a formal layoff process with severance. Probably not even all the outsourcing companies that Apple/Microsoft/Meta/etc use for tech…

I have no idea what a "W-2 job" is. In my country, and most countries, it doesn't matter if you're paid by the hour, by the "year" (what?), salaried etc. Virtually every employee has an employment contract, and every employee without an explicit employment contract (which is illegal) has an implied employment contract.

In the US we have exempt and non-exempt employees. Non-exempt have more protections and have to be paid hourly and twice a month. They have to be paid overtime rates. There are other legal protections. Big one is the government will take direct action against employees that break labor laws against exempt employees. Where for non-exempt it mostly a civil matter.

Exempt employees are generally managers, engineers, that perform complex autonomous decision based work. Typically they are paid a monthly salary. But they don't have to be. I'm exempt and get paid hourly, every two weeks and I in theory get overtime.

Re: Layoffs are down, but employers are still finding ways to cut jobs

#38

Post by garrickvanburen »

noname123 wrote: post #26

Folks flagged ae_throw's question and got it to be muted (which I found very interesting)... so I'm resurrecting his question from and answering it anyways: >Can someone give a reasonable argument as to why we should read WSJ? Or WaPo? Or NYT or any other large publication of this nature (looking particularly at The Economist). We know they post propaganda, spin stories however they please, and we know their fact che…

Yes, all media is biased, from well established outlets like WSJ and NYT to Hacker News to my own blog and a random celeb's Twitter feed.

Biased in both how stories are covered as well in _which_ stories are covered.

The bias may not line up neatly to the prevailing major US political partys' platform or narrative - it's still bias.

Very simplistic example; NYT is biased pro-New York. WaPo is biased pro-D.C. The Economist is pro-EU. All are pro-full-time 9-to-5 jobs.

I've been a subscriber to all at one more or another. Those biases means a solid chunk of their articles are irrelevant or just real weird for readers (me) in a different locale and life situations.

The comparison to sports is apt. Unless you're on the field - sports is entertainment. Same is true of media - unless you care how a story you're directly involved in is being discussed - it's all entertainment.

Re: Layoffs are down, but employers are still finding ways to cut jobs

#39

Post by mvdtnz »

snkline wrote: post #31
mvdtnz wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea what a "W-2 job" is. In my country, and most countries, it doesn't matter if you're paid by the hour, by the "year" (what?), salaried etc. Virtually every employee has an employment contract, and every employee without an explicit employment contract (which is illegal) has an implied employment contract.

In the US, implied employment contracts are "at-will". This means the employer may fire an employee for any reason (except reasons that explicitly break a law, like firing a black employee for being black). Likewise, an employee can quit at any time, with no recourse for the employer (2-weeks notice is a custom, not a contractual obligation under at-will employment).

Just to be clear we don't have indentured servitude or forced labour in my country either. Employees can quit any time they like, even with employment contracts. A contract cannot force anyone to work, under any conditions. Even with a contracted notice period an employee can walk away at any moment. They would be in breach of their employment agreement but there's very little recourse on the employers side. The employee must be paid for any work they have performed, no exceptions.

The employer may sue for damages in the case an employee does not complete their notice period, but they cannot force them to work it. And the employer would need to demonstrate damages.

But an employer cannot just dump an employee who has an employment contract (implied or explicit).

Re: Layoffs are down, but employers are still finding ways to cut jobs

#40

Post by lotsofpulp »

Gibbon1 wrote: post #37
mvdtnz wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea what a "W-2 job" is. In my country, and most countries, it doesn't matter if you're paid by the hour, by the "year" (what?), salaried etc. Virtually every employee has an employment contract, and every employee without an explicit employment contract (which is illegal) has an implied employment contract.

In the US we have exempt and non-exempt employees. Non-exempt have more protections and have to be paid hourly and twice a month. They have to be paid overtime rates. There are other legal protections. Big one is the government will take direct action against employees that break labor laws against exempt employees. Where for non-exempt it mostly a civil matter. Exempt employees are generally managers, engineers, tha…

I have never heard of non exempt employees having more protections or having to be paid twice a month, in any US jurisdiction. Can you provide an example?

I have only ever heard of non exempt and exempt to simply distinguish employees that are owed overtime after 40 hours per week and employees that are not owed overtime after 40 hours per week.

There is no federal law about pay frequency, but pretty much all states require at least monthly, if not semi monthly or biweekly, regardless of exempt or non exempt nature of employee.

https://www.patriotsoftware.com/blog/payroll/pay-frequency-r...

Post reply on HN