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

Googler... ex-Googler

nerdy.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 1001 posts

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#71

Post by lazide »

mistrial9 wrote: post #48
weinzierl wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I have been through layoffs where other people on my team, doing the same job I did approximately as well, got laid off. No explanation given for why them and not me. And it could happen to me at any time." Usually there is a hidden variable that you don't know. It is your salary. That is why it sometimes looks surprising when senior roles are cut that look extremely valuable to the company from the outset. Maybe th…

ok, and also "big thieves hate little thieves." Very-well paid executives (stock) remove very well paid employees (salary) and benefit from the actions. This is an old situation in industrial business -- the high tech crowd are filled with self-grandeur and do not believe it, on a large scale IMHO.

Eh, or you could think of it as ‘cut 10 people to move the needle x percent, or cut 1’.

If you need to hit a specific number, guess which one is going to be less paperwork….

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#72

Post by lazide »

ein0p wrote: post #53

As an ex-Googler I say: blessing in disguise. When working at a $MEGACORP it's easy to think there's barren wasteland out there beyond the walls, so it's scary. But that is very much not so. I get that opportunities to work on browsers are relatively few and far between, but if you can do something else, try working for a smaller company which treats you more like a human being, and less like a replaceable cog. Not m…

It is much easier to handle when departing is voluntary. Layoffs, especially surprise ones, are the opposite.

For someone young with no dependents, it can be scary but doable. For those with kids? Not so much.

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#73

Post by lazide »

rdtsc wrote: post #15

Sadly two management levels above we’re just a line in a spreadsheet. Maybe even one level above. “Hey look, this one is cog is spinning at a cost $200k/year, why don’t we replace it with a cog from a low cost country and save some money?” Or “remove it and make this one other cog do the work of this obe?” People doing the replacement have to show they did something, as well!

Upper management has targets they need to meet. If they don’t, they’re out the door even faster than your typical junior engineer who is struggling to code.

The targets often aren’t what you’d think though.

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#75

Post by ricardobeat »

lurking_swe wrote: post #68
ricardobeat wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some perspective, the bulk of this is simply illegal in the Netherlands, likely other countries in the EU as well: - layoff plans must be communicated ahead of time. Minimum 30 days notice, usually much more - Needs to be negotiated with worker representatives (works council, syndicate if there is one) - LIFO principle for layoffs, newest employees are let go first. Stack ranking not possible - Any kind of discri…

it’s also a bit baffling that someone who’s been at the company longer than myself could have an advantage simply for being born before me, or for applying before me. Is work performance not a key deciding factor? One could argue that’s absurd. I don’t think the way it’s done in the U.S. is “right”, but i don’t think what you listed is right either.

Layoffs are for companies to reduce the size of their workforce and lower operating costs, skill distribution remains the same – there are various exceptions to ensure this.

If some employees are underperforming they should already be on their way out. That also is a process protected by law (no at-will employment here), otherwise layoffs would just be an excuse to expedite firings without going through the necessary steps. In short, being employed assumes you can perform at a satisfactory level, which makes sense to me. The flipside is that hiring is a much bigger commitment as people are not disposable.

Voluntary severance packages are usually offered ahead of layoffs, and include compensation based on years worked, so things can balance out a little.

The whole regulations are more about the social impact. Younger employees have an easier time re-arranging their lives and finding new jobs, are less likely to apply for welfare, and still have time left to switch careers, so this benefits everyone.

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#76

Post by marcusb »

ricardobeat wrote: post #62
marcusb wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Usually there is a hidden variable that you don't know. This is frequently the case. I've worked at big employers (comparable in level of corporate-ness to Google if not absolute size) where the layoff process, roughly was: 1. Aggregate layoff target gets set and apportioned amongst functional leaders, then targets cascaded down to the line manager level. 2. Managers fill out a stack ranking spreadsheet for their t…

For some perspective, the bulk of this is simply illegal in the Netherlands, likely other countries in the EU as well: - layoff plans must be communicated ahead of time. Minimum 30 days notice, usually much more - Needs to be negotiated with worker representatives (works council, syndicate if there is one) - LIFO principle for layoffs, newest employees are let go first. Stack ranking not possible - Any kind of discri…

> layoff plans must be communicated ahead of time. Minimum 30 days notice, usually much more

In the United States, employers with more than 100 full-time, non-probationary employees must provide 60 days notice of most planned layoffs[0]

> - LIFO principle for layoffs, newest employees are let go first. Stack ranking not possible

This is functionally equivalent to a stack ranking in that it is a forced-distribution scheme. It is just based on a single factor that is outside of the employee's control. Say what you want about stack ranking, but people do have a large degree of control over their job performance.

> Any kind of discrimination is forbidden

In the United States any kind of job discrimination against members of protected classes[1] in illegal. Even inadvertently disparately impacting[2] members of a protected group is illegal.

0 - https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/termination/plantclosings

1 - https://www.eeoc.gov/employers/small-business/3-who-protecte...

2 - https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/disparate_impact

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#77

Post by ein0p »

lazide wrote: post #72
ein0p wrote: post #53

As an ex-Googler I say: blessing in disguise. When working at a $MEGACORP it's easy to think there's barren wasteland out there beyond the walls, so it's scary. But that is very much not so. I get that opportunities to work on browsers are relatively few and far between, but if you can do something else, try working for a smaller company which treats you more like a human being, and less like a replaceable cog. Not m…

It is much easier to handle when departing is voluntary. Layoffs, especially surprise ones, are the opposite. For someone young with no dependents, it can be scary but doable. For those with kids? Not so much.

OP spent several years at Google. Kids or no kids, if they managed their finances well, they have a lot of latitude wrt next moves.

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#78

Post by bdangubic »

ein0p wrote: post #77
lazide wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is much easier to handle when departing is voluntary. Layoffs, especially surprise ones, are the opposite. For someone young with no dependents, it can be scary but doable. For those with kids? Not so much.

OP spent several years at Google. Kids or no kids, if they managed their finances well, they have a lot of latitude wrt next moves.

outside of having stupid money what percentage of people (excluding people living paycheck to paycheck) manage their finances well, especially in the first decade of their career? I’d ballpark that at 0.78%

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#79

Post by mandelbrotwurst »

somesortofthing wrote: post #30
ivraatiems wrote: post #9

The reality of one's lack of value to one's own employer is often baffling. It makes you wonder how anyone manages to stay employed at all, since apparently everyone is replicable and unimportant. I have been through layoffs where other people on my team, doing the same job I did approximately as well, got laid off. No explanation given for why them and not me. And it could happen to me at any time. It doesn't matter…

Layoffs in particular are like this because they're planned very quickly by very small groups of people. Rumors of impending layoffs obliterate morale, so the people in charge do everything they can to maintain secrecy and minimize the time between people hearing about layoffs and the layoffs taking effect. This basically always translates to random-seeming decisions - priority 1 is to cut costs by X amount, choosing…

It seems rather disappointing if typical management would make such impactful decisions so rapidly that their "on paper" analysis couldn't be made clever enough to consider more than a single variable.
Post reply on HN