4 ms·

Super cynical take- Is this preparation for layoffs? With no hard-set PTO, do they still have to reimburse outstanding time off as required by law?

karmakurtisaani 4y ago
Or rather, as times get tougher, no one will dare to take any time off in fear of layoffs. An easy win for the company.
idiotsecant 4y ago
It sounds like they are paying out the existing PTO banks, so that wouldn't be a very good strategy if so.
_fat_santa 4y ago
It's just a way for them to reduce the amount of PTO people take. Basically if you give people a set amount of PTO they will take it all, but if you tell someone they have "unlimited PTO", they will almost certainly take less.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
qbasic_forever 4y ago
They already had some small layoffs last year: https://www.axios.com/2022/10/18/microsoft-layoffs-latest-tech-firm-cuts https://www.axios.com/2022/10/18/microsoft-layoffs-latest-te...
UltraViolence 4y ago
Why are people all pented-up over a few layoffs? This is the normal order of things. Over the years the Big Tech companies have hired enormous numbers of bods and most of them are merely flab, adding nothing to the bottom line.
- ROTMetro 4y ago
  Because going through layoffs is extremely stressful for people, and sometimes it takes them years to get their career back on track? Because people might be in the process of things like closing on a house, or worse, in the middle of building a house, which layoffs can kind of complicate in a negative way. Because people are human beings who empathize when bad things happen to people, not with companies that did an 'oops' an over hired and place the consequence of their over hiring on people just trying to live their life.
  - birdymcbird 4y ago
    > “ Because people are human beings who empathize when bad things happen to people, not with companies that did an 'oops' an over hired and place the consequence of their over hiring on people just trying to live their life.” agree 100%. But adding to this: in anecdotal big tech experience at two companies, many people producing no value. they know this. rest and vest is what they did. managers were given increasing headcounts. they hire more and more managers. explosion of managerial class then hire kids out of school. no vision..direction..why teams or even entire orgs exist. this a massive grift when you paying $200k+ in salary and rsu alone to most junior ic and $300k to most junior manager. how you provide value is question no one asked. instead people brag ‘i have org with 60 people’ or 300 people. Ego game, broken incentive, and innovation declines. Customers lose because to show revenue growth, both me companies just show more ads. hardworking good workers losing jobs. companies to blame but also to blame people comfortable in fake jobs especially managerial class who do nothing.
UncleMeat 4y ago
They are reimbursing all outstanding time when this goes into effect. So if you wanted to reduce the amount of vacation reimbursement, you probably wouldn't make this change.
fatnoah 4y ago
In a bit of irony, when my last company did this, we all had a conspiracy theory that the goal was to reduce the cost of the layoff. As it turns out, there was a layoff a few months after the change, but the company paid out all of the PTO that people had previously accrued.
paxys 4y ago
They have to reimburse time already accrued, so no, this switch is actually a lot more expensive for them in the short term.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
agloeregrets 4y ago
1: As said by others they will pay out unused PTO in April. That said, they can put it in conjunction with layoffs but I would think they would do it earlier than then pay less. After April, it is WAY easier to do Layoffs for them though, the band-aid is ripped off. 2: For old policy, yes, after that, you formally get '0 PTO' by law.

karmakurtisaani 4y ago

Or rather, as times get tougher, no one will dare to take any time off in fear of layoffs. An easy win for the company.

idiotsecant 4y ago

It sounds like they are paying out the existing PTO banks, so that wouldn't be a very good strategy if so.

_fat_santa 4y ago

It's just a way for them to reduce the amount of PTO people take. Basically if you give people a set amount of PTO they will take it all, but if you tell someone they have "unlimited PTO", they will almost certainly take less.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

qbasic_forever 4y ago

They already had some small layoffs last year: https://www.axios.com/2022/10/18/microsoft-layoffs-latest-tech-firm-cuts https://www.axios.com/2022/10/18/microsoft-layoffs-latest-te...

UltraViolence 4y ago

Why are people all pented-up over a few layoffs? This is the normal order of things. Over the years the Big Tech companies have hired enormous numbers of bods and most of them are merely flab, adding nothing to the bottom line.

ROTMetro 4y ago
Because going through layoffs is extremely stressful for people, and sometimes it takes them years to get their career back on track? Because people might be in the process of things like closing on a house, or worse, in the middle of building a house, which layoffs can kind of complicate in a negative way. Because people are human beings who empathize when bad things happen to people, not with companies that did an 'oops' an over hired and place the consequence of their over hiring on people just trying to live their life.
- birdymcbird 4y ago
  > “ Because people are human beings who empathize when bad things happen to people, not with companies that did an 'oops' an over hired and place the consequence of their over hiring on people just trying to live their life.” agree 100%. But adding to this: in anecdotal big tech experience at two companies, many people producing no value. they know this. rest and vest is what they did. managers were given increasing headcounts. they hire more and more managers. explosion of managerial class then hire kids out of school. no vision..direction..why teams or even entire orgs exist. this a massive grift when you paying $200k+ in salary and rsu alone to most junior ic and $300k to most junior manager. how you provide value is question no one asked. instead people brag ‘i have org with 60 people’ or 300 people. Ego game, broken incentive, and innovation declines. Customers lose because to show revenue growth, both me companies just show more ads. hardworking good workers losing jobs. companies to blame but also to blame people comfortable in fake jobs especially managerial class who do nothing.

UncleMeat 4y ago

They are reimbursing all outstanding time when this goes into effect. So if you wanted to reduce the amount of vacation reimbursement, you probably wouldn't make this change.

fatnoah 4y ago

In a bit of irony, when my last company did this, we all had a conspiracy theory that the goal was to reduce the cost of the layoff. As it turns out, there was a layoff a few months after the change, but the company paid out all of the PTO that people had previously accrued.

paxys 4y ago

They have to reimburse time already accrued, so no, this switch is actually a lot more expensive for them in the short term.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

agloeregrets 4y ago

1: As said by others they will pay out unused PTO in April. That said, they can put it in conjunction with layoffs but I would think they would do it earlier than then pay less. After April, it is WAY easier to do Layoffs for them though, the band-aid is ripped off. 2: For old policy, yes, after that, you formally get '0 PTO' by law.