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

Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

blogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 284 posts

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#71

Post by Arainach »

rcme wrote: post #14
whatever1 wrote: post #5

Families will get torn apart, people with health issues will be on their own, immigrants will get booted. C-suite will get a raise from the stock price bump. Congrats on our system.

People with health issues should still be able to purchase their existing insurance through COBRA, and, once that expires, through the public exchanges that are guaranteed to cover their existing condition. Thanks ACA.

When I left Microsoft I believe the cost I was quoted for COBRA was thousands a month - not quite as much as my salary when I was working there but enough that it would have rapidly depleted my savings if I didn't find another job immediately.

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#72

Post by hprotagonist »

Sebb767 wrote: post #34

While there is no good way to do a mass-layoff, I don't particularly like the way this was communicated. There's a lot of flowery language and the fact that there will be massive layoffs is only said in passing in the third paragraph. This will never be good news, obviously, but please communicate the important facts clearly.

10k is ~5% of FTEs. Not nothing, but not 20%, either.

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#73

Post by danans »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #38
themitigating wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is Microsoft doesn't have to be so generous.

And yet they are. Even though they could give you nothing, they chose otherwise.

It's not just from the goodness of their hearts.

Fundamentally, they chose this approach because those who receive the benefits will have to sign NDAs and because they don't want their reputation as an employer to be poisoned.

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#74

Post by jsiepkes »

Sebb767 wrote: post #34

While there is no good way to do a mass-layoff, I don't particularly like the way this was communicated. There's a lot of flowery language and the fact that there will be massive layoffs is only said in passing in the third paragraph. This will never be good news, obviously, but please communicate the important facts clearly.

The only honest thing he could have said would be: "Look, in the end this about shareholder value and we need to sacrifice some people in order to create shareholder value. I know, it sucks, but let's not kid ourselves, we all knew that's the game we are playing here at Microsoft (or any publicly traded company). We got some nice perks while it lasted but unfortunately the party is over now. We will do our best to ensure everyone affected gets a fair severance package.".

Anything else is basically a lie.

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#75

Post by college_physics »

There was a sentiment in an earlier discussion [0] that this is "a war on tech wages" but for years the argument was that tech will make many other jobs obsolete (which would justify wage growth for tech employees).

Remember, e.g., the Jack Ma era and his proclamations that we should all get into arts because tech will take care of the rest?

Is the current round of layoffs an admission that the "software will eat the world" scenario will not happen or an indication that it can be done with even fewer tech employees?

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#76

Post by coldpie »

_huayra_ wrote: post #66
habosa wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scale of benefits generally looks like: Average US worker << Average EU worker < US Big Tech Worker

I wonder where EU tech workers (big or not) fit in this. Certainly pay is less than US, but when I worked in Europe, everyone took all of their vacation time and generally did not work beyond regular business hours. Where I work today in the US, even junior devs (i.e. no on-call or general need to fight fires outside of regular hours) are grinding away on nights and weekends. The only way I can basically take a half-…

> Where I work today in the US, even junior devs (i.e. no on-call or general need to fight fires outside of regular hours) are grinding away on nights and weekends.

Wow. Most places are not like that. Get out of there.

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#78

Post by eddieroger »

ano-ther wrote: post #60
sbarre wrote: post #10

They're spreading it out over the full year. Interesting that they would announce it up front like this? What does this do to morale and retention?

1 They have to. It’s a “material event” that could impact the stock price, so they have to communicate to investors, once a decision has been taken. 2 They probably want to. It creates clarity for employees after what other commenters here described as months-long rumours. The damage to morale would be greater if they do it in pieces. 2b It is also a better story for investors.

2c Some of the problem solves itself, as people naturally leave at a more accelerated pace in the face of uncertainty.

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#79

Post by cokeandpepsi »

themitigating wrote: post #24
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #4

>U.S.-benefit-eligible employees will receive a variety of benefits, including above-market severance pay, continuing healthcare coverage for six months, continued vesting of stock awards for six months, career transition services, and 60 days’ notice prior to termination, regardless of whether such notice is legally required. Wow, that way way, better than what we get by law in my EU country when you're laid off (ju…

The difference is Microsoft doesn't have to be so generous.

yeah most american's don't receive severance outside unpaid vacation, the funny thing is that the people who need it most usually don't

Re: Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

#80

Post by swozey »

Karunamon wrote: post #61
rcme wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People with health issues should still be able to purchase their existing insurance through COBRA, and, once that expires, through the public exchanges that are guaranteed to cover their existing condition. Thanks ACA.

Entirely serious question: is COBRA actually of any use to anyone? From where I sit it's always been pretty aspirational since it requires you to also pay the employer side of the insurance which is colossally more expensive than the employee side, and you are expected to do this while being out of work?

You can opt out of it (or not opt in) up until, I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong) for up to a year after leaving the job meaning that you can deny coverage UNLESS something major comes up then you pay from that point on. So it's useful for that event, some emergency coming up.

I've never paid for it, the one time I had it come up it was something like $800/mo for me as a single 20s laid off person. Not top priority.

Post reply on HN