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

Prisma laying off 28% staff

prisma.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 246 posts

Re: Prisma laying off 28% staff

#81

Post by epolanski »

harha wrote: post #75
epolanski wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I take full responsibility" is always referred to the investors and shareholders. aka "I admit I have done a bad decision when I over hired and I'm correcting it". It's not a "I take full responsibility" towards the employees or customers.

Right, but the letters are typically directed towards employees.

Thus the hypocrisy.

They are taking the responsibility for having overhired and are acting on this responsibility by laying off.

They are not taking responsibility in front of laid off staff in any actionable way but "you can blame me rather than human resources, PMs that cried for more engineers, investors that were looking for signs of growth via head count..." which again is a sign of taking responsibility in front of shareholders, not really employees.

Re: Prisma laying off 28% staff

#83

Post by Keyframe »

phoe-krk wrote: post #73
Keyframe wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean something like OKRs+KPIs, sales quotas, revenue targets, budgets…

All these that you mentioned are metrics for measuring responsibility towards the company and its shareholders. I mean metrics for measuring responsibility towards the people , especially the laid-off ones - there seems to be absolutely none of these.

Right, but on the other hand there’s no responsibility if there’s no metric. Someone took responsibility on them to have revenue enough to keep people around, someone failed at that. Maybe revenue was enough but there was a decision to cut people anyways - someone who had responsibility to keep people they’ve hired. Someone might’ve hired HR people in order to grow the company, and now they’ve decided they don’t want to so let’s cut HR people.. nothing outside of contract stands between management and a worker if there’s no syndicate. Contract is easily terminated though, with or without penalties - depending. I guess companies aren’t our friends after all?

Re: Prisma laying off 28% staff

#84

Post by pcthrowaway »

Isn't giving only a month of severance terrible for morale of remaining team members?

I suspect I'd be looking for another job if this was me.

Or conversely, why is every other company giving a minimum of 2 months of severance?

Re: Prisma laying off 28% staff

#86

Post by saos »

I’m curious. These lay-off were inevitable… however what are people predicting will happen in 3-4 years time? Back to hiring frenzy?

> Severance pay: All departing team members will receive one month of additional pay per year of service, plus the payout of any accrued PTO.

Compared to other companies. This is worst I’ve seen

Re: Prisma laying off 28% staff

#87

Post by satvikpendem »

winter_squirrel wrote: post #79
atdrummond wrote: post #38

If I ever had to layoff a double digit number of employees, I would also layoff myself. I couldn’t in good conscience externalize the impact of my bad decisions on employees whilst leaving myself unaffected.

As a counterpart, if you have to layoff that many people, is it really the right time to also put the stress of a leadership shift into the company? I can see the argument for this triggering an eventual change, but having _both_ the chock of a CEO change _and_ 28% of the company being layed off at the same time seems unwise.

Indeed, laying off the CEO too screws over the entire company, not just the portion of people who got laid off.

Re: Prisma laying off 28% staff

#88

Post by alistairSH »

dtech wrote: post #77
bosie wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you even take responsibility for something if you don’t face any consequences yourself? Like a surgeon killing a patient “taking full responsibility”…

Yes, that means that he takes full responsibility for a mistake, and it wasn't due to other staff, equipment, unforeseen events etc...

Responsibility without consequence is meaningless.

Re: Prisma laying off 28% staff

#89

Post by phoe-krk »

Keyframe wrote: post #83
phoe-krk wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All these that you mentioned are metrics for measuring responsibility towards the company and its shareholders. I mean metrics for measuring responsibility towards the people , especially the laid-off ones - there seems to be absolutely none of these.

Right, but on the other hand there’s no responsibility if there’s no metric. Someone took responsibility on them to have revenue enough to keep people around, someone failed at that. Maybe revenue was enough but there was a decision to cut people anyways - someone who had responsibility to keep people they’ve hired. Someone might’ve hired HR people in order to grow the company, and now they’ve decided they don’t want…

> Right, but on the other hand there’s no responsibility if there’s no metric.

That's why I call BS on the executive saying "I take full responsibility."

> I guess companies aren’t our friends after all?

They never were and never will be unless they decide to be friends. They may create a pleasing environment to do work in and care for good atmosphere in the workplace and press for decent interpersonal communication so that work gets done smoother, but it's all about the common goal of getting work done so they can get paid so you can get paid. This isn't friendship, it's optimization.

Until your employment contract has an explicit friendship clause of some sort, or unless you own or co-own the company, you have no guarantees you are anything more than a mercenary with some legal protections that kick in if you are let go. That's the very basis of capitalism where workers are one of the many manageable resources.

Re: Prisma laying off 28% staff

#90

Post by charcircuit »

alistairSH wrote: post #88
dtech wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that means that he takes full responsibility for a mistake, and it wasn't due to other staff, equipment, unforeseen events etc...

Responsibility without consequence is meaningless.

The parent comment just described the meaning. It's not meaningless.
Post reply on HN