I wouldn't say it's "anti-worker", just armchair discussion of supply-demand economics. You can't improve worker conditions without an honest characterization o

I wouldn't say it's "anti-worker", just armchair discussion of supply-demand economics. You can't improve worker conditions without an honest characterization of market dynamics. It pretty straightforward that a decrease of "open positions" (the supply of jobs) and the increase in "candidates looking for work" (the demand for jobs) would afford employers the leverage to change their hiring strategies. Combine that with post-covid environment where employers want to boost productivity to prior levels, and as they see other companies successfully perform layoffs without huge hits to productivity or stock price, and you get a perfect storm. And yes, most companies that have had had layoffs are still hiring, but obviously more selectively. Follow up: > It sounds like you're saying that companies are going to lay off (say) half their workforce, and replace them by a handful of "10x engineers" who they pay twice as much they don't have to be 10x engineers, just perceived as better than their current "hand". Put some card back in the pile, draw some new ones from the deck. And they don't have to pay them twice as much either (unless a really desirable skillset), it's an employers market.