4 ms·

You don't have to think of companies as evil. They are not inherently immoral, but they certainly are amoral. They will let you go the moment it is no longer pr

You don't have to think of companies as evil. They are not inherently immoral, but they certainly are amoral. They will let you go the moment it is no longer profitable to keep you. Have you been through a layoff before? The executives wring their hands, talk about what a tough decision it was, uproot dozens to thousands of lives - and then get a nice fat bonus when the cost savings reports come in, and the stock value goes up. Things like that teach me that corporate "good will" is an elaborate show. You are an expense to them, a necessary expense to achieve a certain output. You are paid your market value, not penny more. If they can pay you half your salary to get the same output, they will. If they can lay your team off and get significant cost benefits, they will. You are disposable. That doesn't mean they're bad people, they're just doing what any self-serving profit-seeking bureaucracy would do. Thus the relationship between an employer and an employee is always transactional, and any feeling otherwise is an illusion. It's not evil - it just is. The only asterisk to all of this is if you're at a more community-focused organization like a non profit. But the vast majority of companies that employ HN readers are not that.

jollybean 5y ago
" They will let you go the moment it is no longer profitable to keep you. " First - you're mixing streams here. This is not 'amoral'. This is just people trading services. It's not 'amoral' of you to not keep the plumber on when he's done. Second - companies actually do avoid layoffs. Most companies could layoff 10% right now and not skip a beat. Especially white collar. Google could dump 1/2 it's staff and be just fine. Most companies have slack and generally avoid doing layoffs unless there's a special situation. "the relationship between an employer and an employee is always transactional, and any feeling otherwise is an illusion." Generally, this is the case, yes, why on earth would anyone think it's anything else? Why on earth would a company employ people otherwise? But again, once people are employed, they're not doing to drop them instantly. It's all besides the point, in any case, one should be aspiring to 'Do A Good Job'.
- salt-thrower 5y ago
  "Amoral" means neither moral nor immoral. That's exactly how I would describe a transactional relationship, so yes, I'll stick with that word. > Most companies have slack and generally avoid doing layoffs unless there's a special situation. You're just making arbitrary claims here - the fact that companies can and do lay people off without notice and, sometimes, without severance, still confirms the nature of what I'm saying. It's all feel good until it isn't. > why on earth would anyone think it's anything else? I don't know; ask the others in this thread. There are plenty of people here claiming that they owe their company things (time, emotional investment) that go beyond the scope of their employment contract simply because it's "nice." > once people are employed, they're not doing to drop them instantly. This is simply not the case. Or, rather, it can be the case so easily and at any time that it's foolish to assume otherwise.

jollybean 5y ago

" They will let you go the moment it is no longer profitable to keep you. " First - you're mixing streams here. This is not 'amoral'. This is just people trading services. It's not 'amoral' of you to not keep the plumber on when he's done. Second - companies actually do avoid layoffs. Most companies could layoff 10% right now and not skip a beat. Especially white collar. Google could dump 1/2 it's staff and be just fine. Most companies have slack and generally avoid doing layoffs unless there's a special situation. "the relationship between an employer and an employee is always transactional, and any feeling otherwise is an illusion." Generally, this is the case, yes, why on earth would anyone think it's anything else? Why on earth would a company employ people otherwise? But again, once people are employed, they're not doing to drop them instantly. It's all besides the point, in any case, one should be aspiring to 'Do A Good Job'.

salt-thrower 5y ago
"Amoral" means neither moral nor immoral. That's exactly how I would describe a transactional relationship, so yes, I'll stick with that word. > Most companies have slack and generally avoid doing layoffs unless there's a special situation. You're just making arbitrary claims here - the fact that companies can and do lay people off without notice and, sometimes, without severance, still confirms the nature of what I'm saying. It's all feel good until it isn't. > why on earth would anyone think it's anything else? I don't know; ask the others in this thread. There are plenty of people here claiming that they owe their company things (time, emotional investment) that go beyond the scope of their employment contract simply because it's "nice." > once people are employed, they're not doing to drop them instantly. This is simply not the case. Or, rather, it can be the case so easily and at any time that it's foolish to assume otherwise.