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

Big Tech is using layoffs to crush worker power

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 469 posts

Re: Big Tech is using layoffs to crush worker power

#401

Post by spamizbad »

monero-xmr wrote: post #230
deanCommie wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean isn't that default position? Everyone has to go into situations like this with eyes open. If there was no risk to striking or demanding better working conditions, it wouldn't be as rare as it is. I think everyone is aware that by default "the companies" have more power than the individual or the worker class. What's unusual is that in 2021 the balance shifted for a little while for the privileged tech worker c…

It is insanely hard to build a business, and I speak as someone who has built businesses in both tech and franchising (which should theoretically be much more straightforwards). At the primordial stage, before there are reliable revenues, you must have everyone marching to the same drum. If you can’t do what I say, please GTFO because you are actively harming what is already hanging on by a thread. If I can’t fire ba…

People are going to be mad at you but rather than getting mad the correct thing to do is to just not work for a startup. Working at a startup means dealing with a boss (and a business) living on the razor's edge. Maybe that's exciting to you and you want to work really hard to see it succeed -- in which case, go for it!

However, if it's just a job to you, you're actually better off working somewhere else. Also, be aware that most startups are either unable or unwilling to share a piece of the "upside" with you, beyond their ability to simply give you a job, so there's really no point in working for them unless you specifically prefer that work environment OR you can't get hired anywhere else.

I will also say if you're a very talented engineer your talents are likely going to be wasted at a startup. The founder(s) will be too inexperienced and/or under-resourced to utilize your skills beyond building an MVP or whatever. If you're fine with that, again, go for it. But if you're looking for deep technical challenges you're going to need to join a more mature organization.

Re: Big Tech is using layoffs to crush worker power

#402

Post by superfrank »

spaceman_2020 wrote: post #366
superfrank wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On an individual level, I really feel bad for anyone put in that positions. I can't imagine how stressful that would be for anyone going through that. I wouldn't want anyone to go through that. Taking the emotion out of it and looking at a macro level though, I think the program has been abused by big tech to bring in workers who have less bargaining power and I'm all for it getting a bit of a reset. The purpose of t…

Eh, they always have the option of going back to their home countries and use their savings in a vastly stronger currency to tide by. Not to mention that most local markets are very happy to absorb ex-FAANG employees at inflated salaries. 5-8 years of FAANG wages is enough for someone to move back to, say, India, and retire.

For sure moving back home with the savings of a FAANG salary isn't the end of the world, but it still has to be terrible to uproot your entire life and move across the world in such a short period of time.

It's very possible moving back home means pulling kids out of school, leaving friends, and your partner having to quit their job. None of that is fun or easy.

Re: Big Tech is using layoffs to crush worker power

#403

Post by gilbert_vanova »

andsoitis wrote: post #144
gilbert_vanova wrote: post #11

I had a manager namecheck the layoffs as a reason they don't need to move on addressing any of our team's concerns about working conditions. Same manager invoked the Nuremburg Defense the other day. Trying times.

> addressing any of our team's concerns about working conditions What are some of your team's concerns about working conditions? Are you guys being treated badly?

* Non-competitive pay

* No sick leave & limited vacation

* Inconsistent and insufficient planning paired with unrealistic expecations

Re: Big Tech is using layoffs to crush worker power

#404

Post by s1artibartfast »

Apocryphon wrote: post #209
aeternum wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine how terrible it would be to be on a team with subpar engineers with some kind of tenure / union protection so they cannot be fired. I think this is a big reason tech workers are opposed to the idea.

On the other hand, I’ve seen great teams who were continuously stymied and stonewalled by incompetent leadership who failed to address the concerns of engineering, who refused to be transparent, who made boneheaded decisions without a check in power. Tech, particularly Silicon Valley tech startups, have always had rather lofty ideals and conjured visions of employee empowerment, which management then fail to deliver…

Why do you need a formal Union for that? Europe is full of voluntary workers guilds that provide employee input to leadership. I'm very open to this model in the US. It is less adversarial and does not require employees to be locked into Union rules. As I mentioned above, every employee in the US already has job protections if they strike individually or as a group for improved worker conditions. I think this middle path provides all the upside and none of the downside

Re: Big Tech is using layoffs to crush worker power

#405

Post by Apocryphon »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #404
Apocryphon wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, I’ve seen great teams who were continuously stymied and stonewalled by incompetent leadership who failed to address the concerns of engineering, who refused to be transparent, who made boneheaded decisions without a check in power. Tech, particularly Silicon Valley tech startups, have always had rather lofty ideals and conjured visions of employee empowerment, which management then fail to deliver…

Why do you need a formal Union for that? Europe is full of voluntary workers guilds that provide employee input to leadership. I'm very open to this model in the US. It is less adversarial and does not require employees to be locked into Union rules. As I mentioned above, every employee in the US already has job protections if they strike individually or as a group for improved worker conditions. I think this middle…

I don't think a formal union is necessarily required. However, American business culture has such an antagonistic relationship between management and labor that it is likely such guilds' input would be automatically discarded by many companies' management. Compound that in tech the spirit of worker solidarity or even collaboration is often dismissed, you don't even see engineering "guilds" forming at tech companies.

I think a true middle path would be German-style co-determination, where there is active engagement and cooperation between workers and management as equals, moderated by the government.

https://www.deutschland.de/en/topic/business/co-determinatio...

https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/eurwork/indust...

Re: Big Tech is using layoffs to crush worker power

#406

Post by renewiltord »

kilgnad wrote: post #288
renewiltord wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty clever idea. I'm against tech unions entirely, but I have to say that the just-in-time union is a pretty neat idea.

Really? it was generated by chatGPT. Just kidding. Thanks!

Haha if it were it wouldn't be the first time I'd have enjoyed something from there.

Re: Big Tech is using layoffs to crush worker power

#407

Post by j245 »

giantg2 wrote: post #343
j245 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common argument I hear, it just doesn’t hold water. We should absolutely hold Big Tech accountable for their business models and actions. On the whole though, they have released many orders of magnitude more useful things than Hedge Funds. Is there a Citadel Maps I can use ? Or a TwoSigma framework like React ? At least Big Tech has ad-powered useful services. Hedge funds gobble up PhD holders and the cream…

"On the whole though, they have released many orders of magnitude more useful things than Hedge Funds." Well no shit - you're comparing an entity that creates "things" to one that doesn't! "gobble up PhD holders and the cream of the crop and use them to make 0.1% of the population 5% wealthier" Um, Google does this with data scientists. Maybe they do create a useful app, but make no mistake that their primary goal is…

You’ve missed the point…

An entity that puts nothing into the host system, but consumes resources from the host to fatten itself is a parasite.

In the case of hedge funds, it’s a zero-sum game. Either you or the counter party lose depending on how the bet goes. In aggregate, society gets nothing, but the cost of the net zero value is high (highly skilled people, taking resources away from other things). It’s profitable but net useless.

In the case of Google Maps, no one has to lose for me to make a journey. It’s profitable and useful.

Saying, ohh but they both operate in a capitalistic system to make money for shareholders is not relevant.

How is that money generated ?

Re: Big Tech is using layoffs to crush worker power

#408

Post by gumby »

Apocryphon wrote: post #352
gumby wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the 2008 global financial crisis? Many companies died, some companies did do layoffs but that was in response to an actual financial crisis, something not happening now and unlikely to happen in 2023 or 2024. Nothing like that nitwit was describing.

Weren't periodic layoffs something that happened up to and during the dot-com bust? I'm talking about '80s-'90s Silicon Valley.

I don't remember that at all, and I was working in the Valley through that period.

There were a lot in the dotcom crash but that was aperiodic.

Re: Big Tech is using layoffs to crush worker power

#409

Post by petsfed »

dvt wrote: post #279
jakelazaroff wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have the right to build a business. You have the right to try , of course, but it's not like there's some natural law that you should be able to succeed. So appeals to "it's hanging on by a thread!" don't really do much for me; maybe the viability of your business relies on an imbalance of power vs. your employees, in which case I'd really rather the thread be cut. Your comment about firing people is kinda…

> maybe the viability of your business relies on an imbalance of power vs. your employees This is a weird take, as it absolutely does. Kind of how the viability of a military also relies on an imbalance of power between generals and privates. Power structures are fundamentally necessary in productive endeavours.

Two things:

First, power structures are not fundamentally necessary in productive endeavors, but division of responsibility absolutely is. I submit to your authority in situation A, and you in turn submit to my authority in situation B. But insofar as there is a power imbalance, it is a function of how the responsibility is divided, and how often situation A comes up vs situation B.

Is there actually a power imbalance between a general and a private though? There is absolutely a difference in scope of responsibility, but a general, BY THEMSELVES, does not have some special ability to compel that the private does not. The organization inflicts discipline, and its clear that the discipline is necessary for the organization to achieve its goals. But armies that understand the enforcement of discipline as the exercise of a power differential frequently mutiny.

I've read pretty frequently that when you start conceptualizing your marriage in terms of power structures, you may as well draw up the divorce papers, because that endeavor is no longer productive.

Re: Big Tech is using layoffs to crush worker power

#410

Post by dasil003 »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #336
dasil003 wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're missing the point. It's not about entitlement or rights. The point the GP is making is that in a true startup situation, either everyone rows in the same direction, or the business fails and everyone loses their job. This is a very different situation from an established large-scale business. You might say: "doesn't matter, worker rights are worker rights, and it's on the entrepreneur to make sure he can meet…

I'm not missing the point. I just disagree with it. I don't see "business fails" as an inherently bad thing. Some businesses aren't viable and that's okay! To use your rowing analogy: presumably, unless someone is actively trying to sabotage the team, everyone is rowing in the same direction. The issue is more, are the rowers being given enough breaks? Are they demanding too many? Is the captain beating them if they…

You've set up a strawman that has nothing to do with what the GP said.
Post reply on HN