5 ms·
14% seems like a very high number to me to axe at once, how have you got 1 in 7 employees that your business doesn't need to function when it is growing.
by skidev 4y ago
14% seems like a very high number to me to axe at once, how have you got 1 in 7 employees that your business doesn't need to function when it is growing.
- JohnJamesRambo 4y agoMoney was cheap to borrow and get from investors and now it isn’t.
- jagtesh 4y agoAh. It all makes sense now. It is cheaper for them to layoff with a decent 3 month severance than it is to pay high interest on the debt that is funding their salaries (interest rate will stay high > 1 year, going by Powell’s comments). I am glad they did it transparently, but I wish they had been more open about this fact. Shifts the entire perspective IMO.
- csa 4y agoThey are rolling back to February 2022 levels, after having grown a lot in 2020 and 2021. If this is the only cut (big if), then I imagine that most areas outside of HR will not feel much different.
- mritchie712 4y agobetter for morale to go big once then chip away. With this cut, they can confidently say: "this will be the only one".
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- luxcem 4y agoWith 3x growth during the pandemic it seems that the layoff would be avoidable by reducing future growth factor. So what the letter doesn't say is that they layoff people to have better numbers to show to investors, not because it's not sustainable.