6 ms·

> 500 ground positions, 300 cabin crew positions and 300 cockpit positions and approximately 400 positions at KLM subsidiaries and Air France-KLM group functio

> 500 ground positions, 300 cabin crew positions and 300 cockpit positions and approximately 400 positions at KLM subsidiaries and Air France-KLM group functions Non-skilled employees are for a tough ride as a crisis is when most people loses their jobs, and it is when it is more difficult to find a new one. But, this is appalling news for many highly specialized employees. Many of them had a career in fly-related fields. To have skills on an industry that suddenly disappears under your feet is the nightmare of any skilled worker. The software industry slowly re-invents itself, and one needs to keep up to date. But, it has never been such a turning point so fast and that seems that is going to last for long.

Rainymood 6y ago
In a capitalistic system no one "really" cares about you, they care about you in proportion of how profitable you are to them.
- throwaway7281 6y ago
  And that is not per se bad. What is bad is that there no safety net whatsoever and losing a job in the 21st century can feel a bit like having put out out in the desert in the neolithic. Case in point: many European countries with safety nets are just not a cruel place to be at this time.
  - WildGreenLeave 6y ago
    To add to this, The Netherlands has a safety net that is perfectly fine. Is it a lot? No. Is it enough to survive in a normal situation? Yes. I think it makes sense for KLM to lay off those people. A business cannot keep on people if there is no work for them.
- nlitened 6y ago
  In socialistic system no one “really” cares about you either, I can assure you.
  - rado 6y ago
    In Socialism, people exploit people. In Capitalism, it's the exact opposite.
    - midasz 6y ago
      what?
      - cosmolev 6y ago
        you've been exploited
      - alxlaz 6y ago
        It's almost a famous joke from behind the Iron Curtain. The original was actually slightly different: Q: What's the difference between capitalism and communism? A: In capitalism, man exploits fellow man. In socialism, it's exactly the opposite. (Note: original as in, the question was phrased in terms of what's the difference, and the answer famously began with "in capitalism, man exploits fellow man", which was a standard formulation of propaganda texts. There are, of course, countless variants, as with any joke.) It was a tongue-in-cheek way of pointing out that, even though they claimed to have eradicated the exploitation of workers by the owners of the means of production, all that Communist regimes of the time had achieved was to replace it with the exploitation of workers by the state, for the benefit of a small elite that ran the whole system. Once you cut through the propaganda and the jargon, workers were still being exploited (in the Marxist sense) by a small group of wealthy individuals. The exploitation of man by fellow man was a pretty famous, and often-invoked part of Marxist doctrine, and one of the first things that were covered as part of political education courses in schools, workplaces and so on. Besides making the point above, it also mocked the stiff, pseudo-scientific Marxist-Leninist propaganda speak. Most of the people in charge of "political education" were uneducated party activists -- the kind of people who would, indeed, say that "in capitalism, man exploits fellow man, whereas in socialism, it's exactly the opposite" with a straight face, without understanding the double-entendre.
        6y ago
- downvoteme1 6y ago
  Very true said. I don’t know why you were downvoted.
ulfw 6y ago
You must not have been around in 2000. That was a wild ride even for techies.
- jwr 6y ago
  Oh, come on — it was a wild ride if you were employed in an unsustainable VC-funded startup in the US. But the bubble bursting barely even registered for those in larger companies, dealing with longer-term software.
  - chrononaut 6y ago
    Doesn't negate the fact that there was a drop in demand for those skilled workers during that time.
    - alexktz 6y ago
      I feel you're unfairly conflating a 50+ year stable industry with relative job safety vs a decade of flash growth in a brand new industry.
  - bkor 6y ago
    > it was a wild ride if you were employed in an unsustainable VC-funded startup in the US Does it matter? Also, there were loads of techs/devs hired for year 2000 bugfixing. After 2000 it took a while to find something else for them or let them go. Quite a huge amount could not find anything to do after 2000.
  - TuringNYC 6y ago
    I remember being at a large company in 2001 that was forced to shed about 40% of the workforce: Accenture (which went from 40k employees to a bit over half that.) Same story for most of the large systems integration consultancies. Same story for many of our clients: telecom firms, financial services firms People remember 2000 as a tech startup bubble burst. But it was just as much a bubble burst for telecom (AT&T, Global Crossing, Lucent, others), financial services firms, and consultancies.
perfunctory 6y ago
It's probably not so dramatic. > based on the current measures, which include the non-renewal of temporary contracts (1,500 FTEs) and the Voluntarily Departure Scheme (2,000 FTEs). Additionally, natural attrition (500 FTEs) through retirement and the like Voluntarily Departure Scheme will most likely provide a nice compensation package and people nearing retirement will simply not be replaced by new hires.
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  > Voluntarily Departure Scheme will most likely provide a nice compensation package and people nearing retirement will simply not be replaced by new hires. It would be tremendously helpful for layoff notices to improve on the communications of this point, as folks who can be provided a gentle glidepath to retirement are in a different situation than someone who still has many years or decades ahead of them in the workforce and is thrown into a pandemic job market.
madeofpalk 6y ago
Phrasing here is weird how "non skilled" people in for a "tough right", but for skilled people this news is "appalling". Seperately, I'm a developer and I stopped working in March due to reasons unrelated to COVID-19 and now I'm finding it exceptionally hard to get back in and find a job.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- dijit 6y ago
  That can be explained by most companies operating with a hiring freeze right now. I was interviewing with a few companies and all but 1 froze hiring during the process. I think it's to insulate from economic shock; nobody knows how bad each company may be hit.
  - madeofpalk 6y ago
    Yup. I know. Still sucks when you can’t get a job. I too thought because I was a smart web developer that I would always be able to make so. Oops.
- sharken 6y ago
  In the same boat but more a DevOps type here (split time between developing and doing operations). Have some offers already due to being fortunate enough to have someone recommend me in those companies, i think that is still the best way to find a new job.
- Y-Bopinator 6y ago
  I’m in the same boat. Every time I hear a train go by I think about jumping in front of it. Missed my train again.
segmondy 6y ago
"Skilled" employees will be in for a rude awakening if this continues. Airlines are not building planes right? So they don't need as many skilled workers, they will also cut down aeronautic engineers, software engineers, accountants, lawyers, etc. There are lots of industries that support them too. If this continues, it will cascade like a domino effect.

Rainymood 6y ago

In a capitalistic system no one "really" cares about you, they care about you in proportion of how profitable you are to them.

throwaway7281 6y ago
And that is not per se bad. What is bad is that there no safety net whatsoever and losing a job in the 21st century can feel a bit like having put out out in the desert in the neolithic. Case in point: many European countries with safety nets are just not a cruel place to be at this time.
- WildGreenLeave 6y ago
  To add to this, The Netherlands has a safety net that is perfectly fine. Is it a lot? No. Is it enough to survive in a normal situation? Yes. I think it makes sense for KLM to lay off those people. A business cannot keep on people if there is no work for them.
nlitened 6y ago
In socialistic system no one “really” cares about you either, I can assure you.
- rado 6y ago
  In Socialism, people exploit people. In Capitalism, it's the exact opposite.
  - midasz 6y ago
    what?
    - cosmolev 6y ago
      you've been exploited
    - alxlaz 6y ago
      It's almost a famous joke from behind the Iron Curtain. The original was actually slightly different: Q: What's the difference between capitalism and communism? A: In capitalism, man exploits fellow man. In socialism, it's exactly the opposite. (Note: original as in, the question was phrased in terms of what's the difference, and the answer famously began with "in capitalism, man exploits fellow man", which was a standard formulation of propaganda texts. There are, of course, countless variants, as with any joke.) It was a tongue-in-cheek way of pointing out that, even though they claimed to have eradicated the exploitation of workers by the owners of the means of production, all that Communist regimes of the time had achieved was to replace it with the exploitation of workers by the state, for the benefit of a small elite that ran the whole system. Once you cut through the propaganda and the jargon, workers were still being exploited (in the Marxist sense) by a small group of wealthy individuals. The exploitation of man by fellow man was a pretty famous, and often-invoked part of Marxist doctrine, and one of the first things that were covered as part of political education courses in schools, workplaces and so on. Besides making the point above, it also mocked the stiff, pseudo-scientific Marxist-Leninist propaganda speak. Most of the people in charge of "political education" were uneducated party activists -- the kind of people who would, indeed, say that "in capitalism, man exploits fellow man, whereas in socialism, it's exactly the opposite" with a straight face, without understanding the double-entendre.
      - 6y ago
downvoteme1 6y ago
Very true said. I don’t know why you were downvoted.

ulfw 6y ago

You must not have been around in 2000. That was a wild ride even for techies.

jwr 6y ago
Oh, come on — it was a wild ride if you were employed in an unsustainable VC-funded startup in the US. But the bubble bursting barely even registered for those in larger companies, dealing with longer-term software.
- chrononaut 6y ago
  Doesn't negate the fact that there was a drop in demand for those skilled workers during that time.
  - alexktz 6y ago
    I feel you're unfairly conflating a 50+ year stable industry with relative job safety vs a decade of flash growth in a brand new industry.
- bkor 6y ago
  > it was a wild ride if you were employed in an unsustainable VC-funded startup in the US Does it matter? Also, there were loads of techs/devs hired for year 2000 bugfixing. After 2000 it took a while to find something else for them or let them go. Quite a huge amount could not find anything to do after 2000.
- TuringNYC 6y ago
  I remember being at a large company in 2001 that was forced to shed about 40% of the workforce: Accenture (which went from 40k employees to a bit over half that.) Same story for most of the large systems integration consultancies. Same story for many of our clients: telecom firms, financial services firms People remember 2000 as a tech startup bubble burst. But it was just as much a bubble burst for telecom (AT&T, Global Crossing, Lucent, others), financial services firms, and consultancies.

perfunctory 6y ago

It's probably not so dramatic. > based on the current measures, which include the non-renewal of temporary contracts (1,500 FTEs) and the Voluntarily Departure Scheme (2,000 FTEs). Additionally, natural attrition (500 FTEs) through retirement and the like Voluntarily Departure Scheme will most likely provide a nice compensation package and people nearing retirement will simply not be replaced by new hires.

toomuchtodo 6y ago
> Voluntarily Departure Scheme will most likely provide a nice compensation package and people nearing retirement will simply not be replaced by new hires. It would be tremendously helpful for layoff notices to improve on the communications of this point, as folks who can be provided a gentle glidepath to retirement are in a different situation than someone who still has many years or decades ahead of them in the workforce and is thrown into a pandemic job market.

madeofpalk 6y ago

Phrasing here is weird how "non skilled" people in for a "tough right", but for skilled people this news is "appalling". Seperately, I'm a developer and I stopped working in March due to reasons unrelated to COVID-19 and now I'm finding it exceptionally hard to get back in and find a job.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
dijit 6y ago
That can be explained by most companies operating with a hiring freeze right now. I was interviewing with a few companies and all but 1 froze hiring during the process. I think it's to insulate from economic shock; nobody knows how bad each company may be hit.
- madeofpalk 6y ago
  Yup. I know. Still sucks when you can’t get a job. I too thought because I was a smart web developer that I would always be able to make so. Oops.
sharken 6y ago
In the same boat but more a DevOps type here (split time between developing and doing operations). Have some offers already due to being fortunate enough to have someone recommend me in those companies, i think that is still the best way to find a new job.
Y-Bopinator 6y ago
I’m in the same boat. Every time I hear a train go by I think about jumping in front of it. Missed my train again.

segmondy 6y ago

"Skilled" employees will be in for a rude awakening if this continues. Airlines are not building planes right? So they don't need as many skilled workers, they will also cut down aeronautic engineers, software engineers, accountants, lawyers, etc. There are lots of industries that support them too. If this continues, it will cascade like a domino effect.