531–540 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Why isn’t it never something like the CEO doesn’t get any stocks that year. Performance based compensation is absolutely standard for CEOs- Both in terms of options and stock grants.
Do those metrics count "number of people laid off" explicitly? We know they do implicitly because laying off people makes the company more profitable, but is there any penalty for killing jobs? If not, shouldn't there be?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>that should make that person one of the people on proverbial track That's a satisfying thing to say, but as practical advice it's absolutely terrible . Often that person's leadership wasn't the problem, but even when it was, that doesn't necessarily mean that the company will be better-off without them. And that's the question -- what will make the company most likely to be the most successful going forward? Even if…
> Often that person's leadership wasn't the problem, but even when it was, that doesn't necessarily mean that the company will be better-off without them How convenient (for them)! When the company is doing well, they get millions in bonuses because their irreplaceable leadership skills - which make them 2000x more valuable than the least paid worker - were instrumental to the organization's success. When the chips a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And all the debt you pile up while struggling to get hired.
The average tech worker really should not have to go into any debt for even a year long hiatus from their typically well paying job. All that is required is living like a typical American and saving your salary. I honestly don't see how anyone can claim tech workers are not compensated for the volatility inherent in the industry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The ones out of job can join a different company, america’s unemployment rate especially in the tech sector tends to be low. Them doing layoffs doesnt mean the people become destitute. It is better to layoff people who are not adding value to a company, so that those newly unemployed folks can join a different company and build great products and add more value to the economy. Ofcourse this only applies to US tech se…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In many countries severance package is guaranteed by law.
What happens if there isn't enough money left to fund the legally-required severance? Do the taxpayers pick up the cost?
Very generous severance packages and companies/laders should be commended for this. If it's a one-and-done big cut with generous packages to save the company, then good on them. Somehow overhiring and maintaining said headcount long enough to need to do a 20% cut is probably less commendable, but not exactly an outlier there in the current climate. I've always wondered about all these standalone "point solution" comp…
Severence is only so they can dodge regulatory scrutiny. They are not doing it out of the goodness of their hearts and was a line-item in the burden category for those employees when they were hired.
This kind of no-win complaining is tiresome.
Very generous severance packages and companies/laders should be commended for this. If it's a one-and-done big cut with generous packages to save the company, then good on them. Somehow overhiring and maintaining said headcount long enough to need to do a 20% cut is probably less commendable, but not exactly an outlier there in the current climate. I've always wondered about all these standalone "point solution" comp…
16% in 2023: https://blog.dropbox.com/topics/company/a-message-from-drew
Or, before that, another 11%: https://dropbox.gcs-web.com/node/8916/html
I wish them well, things look rough.
TIL that nobody knows what they're doing. Jokes aside, how do you end up having more than 500 excess people than what you need? What is management exactly doing during the time they went from 1 excess person to 500? Did they just hope the "macroeconomic headwinds" would become tailwinds? Didn't they at some point see that they have more people than valuable work, and maybe we should deal with that problem instead of…
> Actually, I know why. It's because they have too much money Money was almost literally free for like a decade. I'm so glad that era is over, and I hope it never returns, but the period of adjustment as businesses discover that they have to actually have a business model again does suck a bit.
Isn't it for best if society keeps interest gathering, rent seeking, behavior to a minimum and instead encourages that more of the available capital is put to good use?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dunno. It may take 1-2 months to prepare for Leetcode style interviews, and this can be pretty mentally exhausting. Every time you fail to solve a leetcode question, it feeds your imposter syndrome, which is probably even worse due to getting fired.
With all due respect, that sounds like a personal shortcoming to me. One can (and should) not take interviews personally. One also can (and should) be able to acquit oneself well at an interview even without prep time.
I don't agree. If you don't prepare at all for an interview, it shows. Aside from leetcode, it's also important to research the company.
My point is mainly that I might be upset if I were in that group that's laid off today. I don't want to prep leetcode for several weeks. It feels like a waste of time.
For context, Drew Houston's total compensation for the year in 2023 was $1.5M: > According to our data, Dropbox, Inc. ... paid its CEO total annual compensation worth US$1.5m over the year to December 2023. That's a notable increase of 34% on last year via https://finance.yahoo.com/news/heres-why-dropbox-inc-nasdaq-... Even if Drew took minimum wage, that would save ~15 jobs assuming $100K all-in comp (which seems lo…
Nope, MBAs have to learn exponential growth is impossible to accomplish forever. Companies should be managed to be profitable, while paying employees and business expenses. Anything other is a pipe dream that eventually blows up, but since only employees suffer while the MBA guys go to become CEO of yet another adventure, who cares. /s
But, I do get a chuckle out of what you believe is a "diss," when you're actually stating that MBA holders will not only do better in life, but they'll also control your fate.
Keep that narrative alive; I love it!