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

Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

blog.dropbox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 1001 posts

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#721

Post by christianqchung »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #307
kiba wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously -- we don't have military commitments to "underpin the global order". We have military commitments to "protect our political and economic interests" -- and who do those benefit? The American people? Nah, not really. But the American people are the ones footing the bill for it, choosing to reduce our own quality of life in order to exert power over other nations (and invade them at will). Of course, it's our…

You've drunk the hegemony koolaid, my friend.

Your lack of a substantive reply is extremely telling.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#722

Post by rsanek »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #399
yellow_lead wrote: post #184

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.

You're telling me you maintain the ability to pass the various interviews that the modern FAANG SWE gauntlet requires year-round? Good for you if so, but this doesn't match the experience of any of the folks that I've worked with across my career.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#723

Post by rsanek »

nsxwolf wrote: post #714
lesuorac wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The minimum needed in the US for this situation is 60 calendar days [1]. Hence the 16 weeks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraini...

The WARN Act doesn't mandate severance payments AFAIK.

I think perhaps that's why poster used "for this situation" -- if a company doesn't want to have to provide advance notice, their only option with WARN is to do it with this kind of severance payment. Not sure if it was intended but that's a pretty cool outcome of the law.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#724

Post by frmersdog »

tschellenbach wrote: post #551

The same forces that enable high tech salaries, also make layoffs more likely. - The market for talent is competitive. So companies bid up to the absolute max they can - The market for managers is also competitive. Creating dynamics that lead to larger teams and raises for team members - Companies allow things like remote work, which is a perk, but also has a lot of abuse in terms of how much work gets done The end r…

It comes down to the concentration of wealth. Companies wouldn't have the capital to bid up salaries if they faced stiffer competition or couldn't access investment from a limited pool of investors (who all think the same), as is the case now. I know that "diversity" is a dirty word these days, but it's key. A large middle class, where each family has a small amount of money to put towards their diverse desires, is going to lead to a more stable economy than all of the money pooled in the hands of a small group with a much smaller set of needs. Dropbox should never have been able to hire so many people; that capital should have been in the hands of the larger public, who could have spent it supporting a more diverse set of hundreds or thousands of jobs (who wouldn't all be competing with each other for a limited number of seats in the "not laid off" lifeboat).

Put simply, these kinds of things are going to keep happening until our wealthiest (individuals/families/companies) are a lot less rich.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#725

Post by thaumasiotes »

tschellenbach wrote: post #551

The same forces that enable high tech salaries, also make layoffs more likely. - The market for talent is competitive. So companies bid up to the absolute max they can - The market for managers is also competitive. Creating dynamics that lead to larger teams and raises for team members - Companies allow things like remote work, which is a perk, but also has a lot of abuse in terms of how much work gets done The end r…

> The market for talent is competitive.

A couple months ago interviewing.io posted something bragging about how "we do anonymous mock interviews. If people perform well in those interviews, they get introduced directly to a decision-maker at top-tier companies, regardless of how they look on paper." ( https://interviewing.io/blog/i-love-meritocracy-but-all-the-... )

This annoyed me enough that I sent in an email complaining that their introduction process specifically notes that I am not eligible for anything, despite performance measured by the site as "highest ever achieved: 94th percentile" (so, knock that down a bit for being a high water mark), because of an insufficient number of years of experience.

They responded:

> It really sucks, especially in this market, but this policy is a function of us having tried for years to get companies to take junior intros, and it didn't work. We offered to do it completely for free, too, fwiw, and no dice.

How competitive is the market for talent? Let's stipulate that, because of a lack of prior employment, I'm not qualified to have a job. How exactly would that situation change?

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#726

Post by whilenot-dev »

randomdata wrote: post #470
siliconc0w wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a libertarian in most things but I still don't like layoffs from profitable companies. Like it's probably not good for our society that people have to up end their life every few years and probably move to find a new job. Both my parents stayed in the same job for their careers and it meant they could stay in the same place, have kids, build ties to the community, etc. Seems important if you want to not die out a…

> Like it's probably not good for our society that people have to up end their life every few years and probably move to find a new job. The thing is, Dropbox is done (as in feature complete). Like when the construction of a building completes, many people are "laid off" because they aren’t needed anymore. Yeah, you need to keep some people around for things like maintaining the building, but not to the scale of the…

Software engineering, as profession, offers a very different kind of capacity compared to professions found in the construction industry, though. The physical resources for buildings are expensive and rare (land, material etc), whereas compute and storage are literally getting cheaper by the minute. The Silicon Valley dream of getting from garage to unicorn within months might be far from realistic, but still way more probable that in any other industry. Quick prototypes can be built in days and it isn't uncommon for graduates to finish their research with a viable business idea. I never seen that in my circle of architecture friends.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#727

Post by anon291 »

andreimackenzie wrote: post #533
anon291 wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Early-in-career folks are more vulnerable. Even before major family/life costs start to play a role, it can be difficult to save enough for a safety net after moving to an apartment (even w/ roommates) from college & managing student debt, etc. I remember it took me a couple of years of stability to not feel at risk.

Sure, no argument there.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#728

Post by jedberg »

pc86 wrote: post #641
tschellenbach wrote: post #551

The same forces that enable high tech salaries, also make layoffs more likely. - The market for talent is competitive. So companies bid up to the absolute max they can - The market for managers is also competitive. Creating dynamics that lead to larger teams and raises for team members - Companies allow things like remote work, which is a perk, but also has a lot of abuse in terms of how much work gets done The end r…

> There should also be some reasonable government provided safety net There is, it's called Medicaid.

That's not really a solution. You have to be broke to use Medicaid. They expect you to fully drain all your assets first.

I shouldn't have to sell my house to get medical care.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#729

Post by firesteelrain »

xeromal wrote: post #653
dixie_land wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, I feel a lot of my coworkers fell under this trap: if you need cashflow for mortgage on your 4m mansion in (affluent neighborhood), you can't really afford it.

I make a decent salary as a programmer (150k) but my house only cost 250k and my mortgage is about 1400. How I see it, if I have to flip burgers to keep my house, I can pull it off. I can't imagine have a mortgage that's 10gs a month.

> my house only cost 250k

I find it hard to believe you can flip enough burgers to pay that mortgage and still survive. Not many fast food places will pay over 30 hours a week to burger flippers. Managers yes. You would barely survive.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#730

Post by l33t7332273 »

cma256 wrote: post #216
l33t7332273 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if managing the company correctly requires hundreds of people losing their jobs? I understand the anger in this scenario as employees, but I don’t think doing layoffs means leadership is clearly incompetent. Running a company is hard. Doing layoffs definitely says something about the company’s values and current standing, but I don’t think it necessarily means the CEO is bad.

> What if managing the company correctly requires hundreds of people losing their jobs? It occurs to me that there is no failure of performance a CEO can produce and be held responsible for. Are these CEOs really so irreplaceable that when they bet incorrectly they can't be replaced? 20% of employees have been fired. The CEO directly cited mismanagement as the cause. And yet, its impossible to fire him because "its a…

> Are these CEOs really so irreplaceable that when they bet incorrectly they can't be replaced?

That’s the thing though, another comment nailed this perfectly. If they made a +EV decision to hire more people, but the preverbal roulette wheel landed on 00, maybe it’s not a bad bet that they should be fired for.

Post reply on HN