471–480 of 562 posts
Obviously, employees are only due what their employment contract (and labor laws) say they are due.
But that is beside the point. Helping post-layoff employees build trust, loyalty, commitment in both directions.
Knowledge workers are not fungible cogs. Their morale and goodwill result in better performance. And a more attractive workplace for prospective hires.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not just the cheap money, it’s across the board woke language policing. While we should all strive to be more inclusive, it shouldn’t be at the expense of honest and clear communication.
Just a random example, but Delta airline now calls turbulence “rough air” as if that’s more reassuring… I’d rather be spoken to like an adult.
Wow. First time I've seen a layoff post that starts with boasting success. Summary: "6% of the companies we invest in are worth a billion dollars. We're laying of 20% of our staff. We appreciate their efforts. No comment on how we're taking care of those laid off or remaining staff"
Why do they need "taking care" of? Are they fragile school kids? Desparate single mothers who can't make ends meet? What is with this "save our babies!" attitude towards people who are - Well off - Highly skilled ??
These are people. This could be you, or your friend, espouse, mother, sister... And just because you can bounce back, it doesn't mean this is okay.
Even if they have money saved and can use that to find a (hopefully) better next job, that's not easy or guaranteed.
It seems that this "criticism" is more like jealousy than anything else. If they were not earning a bit more than others then we can feel bad for them. Otherwise let's pretend it's fine and yell "screw them".
Meanwhile the rich fucks are still getting richer even with the "risk" they take. Not sure how that can even count as risk, given these VCs are all multi-millionaires that can afford to fail multiple times over in the first place.
But it's somehow easier to hate the person that makes a few more bucks than you, than it is to hate the money hoarders that control the lives of so many of us.
Wow. First time I've seen a layoff post that starts with boasting success. Summary: "6% of the companies we invest in are worth a billion dollars. We're laying of 20% of our staff. We appreciate their efforts. No comment on how we're taking care of those laid off or remaining staff"
They can't even bring themselves to say the words 'laying off', 'redundancies' or even the milder 'letting go'. The staff are merely 'impacted' by this change in focus! Execs just feel like they need to retreat to the safety of euphemisms in these kind of announcements, after first boasting about how well the company is doing, of course.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do they need "taking care" of? Are they fragile school kids? Desparate single mothers who can't make ends meet? What is with this "save our babies!" attitude towards people who are - Well off - Highly skilled ??
It always astonishes me seeing how ingrained this individualistic capitalistic mindset is on so many. People have been brainwashed. These are people. This could be you, or your friend, espouse, mother, sister... And just because you can bounce back, it doesn't mean this is okay. Even if they have money saved and can use that to find a (hopefully) better next job, that's not easy or guaranteed. It seems that this "cri…
Yes they are people, but a company is NOT responsible for them. Where does this come from? An employee has an employment relationship and not a friendship and while it certainly sucks to be let go, it's not the company who is the bad guy.
From what I see, you can't take off your personal morale views from business decisions.
> Meanwhile the rich fucks are still getting richer even with the "risk" they take. What even has that anything to do with what parent is saying? Or the topic we are discussing?
Is in your opinion no company is allowed to let go people, except if they pamper them with a big severance package? Sorry, but your post reads very childish and naive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not just the cheap money, it’s across the board woke language policing. While we should all strive to be more inclusive, it shouldn’t be at the expense of honest and clear communication.
Just a random example, but Delta airline now calls turbulence “rough air” as if that’s more reassuring… I’d rather be spoken to like an adult.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like it is taboo to even discuss the collapse of the so-called "tech" industry. The people invested in it appear to police the dialogue online, which is not something I remember before the dot-com collapse. (Of course, in the early 00's we did not have the same level of manipulation through data collection, tracking, re-ordering of results, comment voting systems, etc.). The attempts of the "tech" believers…
However, calling it a “collapse” is taking it to the other extreme. We’re not going back to the cave age.
Tech/IT is too valuable to be ditched altogether, so we are not going back even to the 80s or 90s. But collapse is appropriate for the kind of lean times ahead: companies getting bought on the cheap, investments evaporating, projects shelved, jobs (or even careers) lost.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That works in internet logic but it's not true. At least, it's not what I've been told inside YC and I don't believe anyone was lying. What it's actually related to is Garry taking over YC and deciding to refocus YC on its original roots. (I specifically asked about that today during an all-hands btw.) At a minimum, it takes longer than 3 days to make a big change like this. I realize that's not a persuasive argument…
they knew about SVB beforehand.
(Being insolvent isn't actually enough to kill a bank as long as the run doesn't start. Of course, here the bank dies when the regulator decides it dies anyway.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you suggesting that YC's success is because of the long-term US monetary policy climate? That's a very incorrect suggestion. It reminds one of how people like to pretend that Elon's money is because his family had an emerald mine. Do you think that a significant percentage of wealth inheritors go on to immigrate across the world and invent electric cars and reusable rockets? Same thing with YC and the investment…
Elon did not invent electric cars. Elon also did not found Tesla. He was an early investor, ousted the real founders, and started calling himself a founder.