at least be humane about it. you don't simply "fire" people for performing below expectations. do the extra legwork, and find a way to get them properly "laid

at least be humane about it. you don't simply "fire" people for performing below expectations. do the extra legwork, and find a way to get them properly "laid off", ie, "eliminate their positions" -- which shouldn't be too difficult here, as after all you say you'd rather hire more senior people -- so they can (1) get unemployment benefits, (2) roll their insurance off into CORBA if at all possible (or the equivalent of you're not in the U.S.), and (3) have at least a theoretical possibility of rehabilitating themselves and getting another job. "firing" per se is just plain vindictive, and seriously endangers their ability to look out for their physical welfare on the short run, and to right their course (in terms of finding a career that's better suited to them) in the longer run I know that you aren't particularly concerned with their welfare (you sound like you're basically fed up with these people, and couldn't care less). but the bottom line is that you still have to recognize that the company shares at least SOME responsibility for the situation. (after all, who hired them, anyway? was it, umm... you, by chance?) and also, treating people humanely just happens to pay (considerable) dividends. as in, the morale of the rest of the team, your company's reputation (and your own reputation). i've seen the (lingering) after-effects of letting go of people gracefully and magnanimously, and of doing the opposite, many, many times. it's well worth the money to do these things properly (and humanely).