> And even if they couldn’t, having a smaller but more productive workforce might be a win. I wouldn’t want to work for a company that somehow managed to get d

> And even if they couldn’t, having a smaller but more productive workforce might be a win. I wouldn’t want to work for a company that somehow managed to get dragged down by 20 people. If losing those people is making the company better, then it sounds like leadership is deeply incompetent and let things fester for way, way, way too long. Keep in mind that some of those people worked there for 12 years; if losing them is a net positive why weren’t they fired a decade ago? I also think the idea that the remaining workers will be more productive is laughable. Events like these crush morale, even if you ultimately agree with the policy decision being made. Never mind what happens when you lose so much knowledge, including entire teams and directors, with basically no warning or opportunity to transfer knowledge. Hope their docs are world class, or their replacements are gonna have a bad time.