26 ms·

Microsoft to lay off 10k workers

346 points by dola 4y ago

MagicMoonlight 4y ago
If you can fire 10,000 people that easily then you have far too many employees
thr0w4w4ymsft 4y ago
MSFT manager of 25+ person team here with no actual heads up on this. The writing has been on the wall for months though from internal comms so this should come as a surprise to no one. No one on my team has any information about this beyond the Satya email, so this is either a "no news is good news" situation (assuming you don't actually want to be laid off), or a poorly executed process. I'm hoping for the former for the sake of my team.
- brink 4y ago
  If he gave managers a heads up, it would have been immediately leaked to the press.
  - sbarre 4y ago
    Becoming a manager in large enterprise companies is basically an entry-level position all over again.. Except people care even less about your job experience since you're "leadership" now and are expected to toe the line no matter what.
    - ddalex 4y ago
      At faangs not even directors get a head up before the night before on plans. The only ones that can set strategy are VPs and above.
    - vishnugupta 4y ago
      Truer words have not been spoken. Can confirm from my experience.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - activitypea 4y ago
    Good thing it didn't leak then, huh
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - x86x87 4y ago
    Lol. This was floating on Blind for at least 2-3 days.
    - dehrmann 4y ago
      Blind has predicted 5 of the last 3 layoffs.
      - x86x87 4y ago
        That's why as a journalist you cannot use it a legit source. But usually you get an advanced warning. This comes with the cost of the paranoia induced by seeing the corporate underbelly
    - kerpotgh 4y ago
      So the weekly layoffs thread is right sometimes!
- photonbeam 4y ago
  > The writing has been on the wall for months though from internal comms What did the hints look like?
  - rk06 4y ago
    Cost cutting. Move to floating desk and reduction in building space. There were few more things. But the shift to floating seats was a big indicator that serious cost cutting is happening. And everyone guessed that layoffs are next. I am based in India. US folks would have seen different signs
  - w0m 4y ago
    Stock went from 350 to 250.
    - mandeepj 4y ago
      > Stock went from 350 to 250 It went to 350 from 30
  - JackFr 4y ago
    Not sure here, but in my experience no backfill hires for voluntary leavers is a pretty good warning.
    - smugma 4y ago
      Other companies stopped backfilling a while ago but doesn't mean they plan on laying people off (and you can look at 2008-2010 for reference to see that some companies didn't backfill but didn't have layoffs). Not over-growing and then shrinking through attrition is one way to rightsize a company in tougher times.
      - JackFr 4y ago
        Absolutely - but absent corporate communications saying "Everything is great" or "OMG we're doomed.", it's a very relevant data point.
  - 4y ago
- wyldfire 4y ago
  I always assumed that the disclosure rules for publicly traded companies would require them not to give anyone notice in advance of the public.
  - joshribakoff 4y ago
    Not true. Companies share material non public information internally. What they do is they have blackout periods where you cant trade the stock, and constant reminders not to trade based upon material non public information (insider trading) Tl;DR = possessing insider info != insider trading Generally speaking, with a layoff, they want all employees to hear it from official sources and not internal rumors.
- zelos 4y ago
  > ...with some notifications happening today. I guess there are complexities with huge multinational companies, but that seems kind of designed to make people like your team worry.
  - aeyes 4y ago
    It's designed so that no one can be blamed because you never know who took the decision and that no one has a chance to speak up against it. My understanding is also that during mass layoffs big companiess can't just cut all low performers / juniors so this might be completely random but we just don't get to know that.
- winReInstall 4y ago
  How can you actually signal you want to be laid off? Is that something you say when the news goes out? Loads of "NoFuture" cooperate punk in the FAMG. Monopoly does not make the work interesting.
  - pjc50 4y ago
    In places where a "consultation process" is legally mandated, that's one of the things you get to discuss. In UK redundancies I have been asked "do you want to take voluntary redundancy?"
    - NGRhodes 4y ago
      > "do you want to take voluntary redundancy?" That seems like a trick question to me.
- wnolens 4y ago
  At least you got an email from Satya. Amazon folks need to stumble across major news outlets.
  - verst 4y ago
    Major news came yesterday. Satya email this morning.
- verst 4y ago
  I know some teams who had a sudden team meeting scheduled by their skip manager for 9 am today. I suspect this is how organization changes will be communicated to affected teams.
- petilon 4y ago
  It is a poorly executed process: "... the reduction of our overall workforce by 10,000 jobs through the end of FY23 Q3". So employees will have to live with uncertainty for the next three months!
  - Prolixium 4y ago
    Maybe they /want/ to see some increase in attrition due to the uncertainty. It's a very rough way of going about that, though.
    - jjeaff 4y ago
      That seems like a bad strategy since employees that are most in demand will be the first to find another job and leave.
    - peanuty1 4y ago
      Why would you quit when you'd get severance if you're laid off?
  - jjtheblunt 4y ago
    Maybe some employees are told the project or division they work on will shut down months from now, so start looking internally for transfers?
  - pyuser583 4y ago
    All employees get 60 days notice, so it seems like there will be 30 days of uncertainty. Maybe I'm optimistic.
    - petilon 4y ago
      That's not how it works. You won't be told 60 days before you are let go. You will be let go and then given pay for 60 days.
      - sangnoir 4y ago
- mym1990 4y ago
  Can you give an example of what a broadly speaking internal comm(not anything specific to MSFT) would look like that might be a red flag for future layoffs?
jstx1 4y ago
> When I think about this moment in time, the start of 2023, it’s showtime – for our industry and for Microsoft. He could have left that part out.
- alex_suzuki 4y ago
  Yeah, way to rub it in. Just weird.
- mc32 4y ago
  It echoes of Steve Ballmer. I hate it when head honchoes try and get cozy with you by signing off with their First Name only --way to take the name away from anyone else in the company with the same name. 99% of the people in a large company like that never met you and don't know you on a first-name basis.
  - mathieuh 4y ago
    It's an attempted mind fuck to disguise the true power dynamic. If they say "we're making cuts, you're done. Leave your laptop on your desk and clear off", it's clear what the power dynamic is. Instead they present themselves as your friend. Even if you don't believe it, social norms dictate that in general you act like you do. Like Zizek says, "fuck you, you're a boss, act like it!". Then you're unsure of what's happening. Do they really feel bad? Maybe they're trying their best, maybe they really care about me personally. It's same with all this corporate-speech that's been emerging recently. They're not your family, they're not your friends, and if it comes to it they will fist you so hard you'll be tasting their perfectly-manicured nails. I think it's very important to always have this in mind and not to tie up your identity with your work. You are a line item on a spreadsheet somewhere to them, nothing more. If you start believing otherwise you are setting yourself up for mental health problems when your use runs out and they kick you to the kerb.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- joewhale 4y ago
ChuckNorris89 4y ago
>U.S.-benefit-eligible employees will receive a variety of benefits, including above-market severance pay, continuing healthcare coverage for six months, continued vesting of stock awards for six months, career transition services, and 60 days’ notice prior to termination, regardless of whether such notice is legally required. Wow, that way way, better than what we get by law in my EU country when you're laid off (just unemployment benefits). Looks like big tech in the US has loads of perks.
- bratao 4y ago
  Legit question, don't EU have by law, very generous unemployment benefits compared to the US?
  - melenaboija 4y ago
    It depends on what you understand with very generous unemployment benefits. Te me just the fact that there is universal healthcare makes the unemployment benefits way better. I am a EU citizen having lived in the US for almost a decade and I still can't overcome the stress of losing my job because of this.
    - prottog 4y ago
      With the higher salary in the US, especially as a software engineer, you could easily put a little bit aside to pay for a healthcare exchange plan for a while if you do ever lose your job.
  - ChuckNorris89 4y ago
    Depends on the EU country. Where I live you get 60% of your pay for something like 6 months, plus the public healthcare coverage. Though, it's not exactly a vacation, as you're expected to prove to the unemployment office you are actively looking for a job and interviewing and you're not allowed to leave the country during that period. I mean you can leave the country, nobody will stop you, but you'll not receive unemployment or healthcare coverage for the period you're out of the country. You can make it a vacation if you're system savvy enough and know how to game the system and aren't risk averse.
whatever1 4y ago
Families will get torn apart, people with health issues will be on their own, immigrants will get booted. C-suite will get a raise from the stock price bump. Congrats on our system.
- jarym 4y ago
  The Federal Reserve wants to tame inflation by cooling the economy. I don't believe that historically that has ever been achieved without causing unemployment to rise. These large companies are ultimately doing what the Fed wants them to do, no point blaming the c-suite for that?
  - malcolmgreaves 4y ago
    They could all take massive pay cuts to preserve jobs. They have agency and they have chosen to enrich their stock price at the expense of people’s lives and well being.
    - shiftingleft 4y ago
      Microsoft net income 2022: ~$70B. Why force pay cuts or fire workers when you have roughly $300k of net income per employee to work with?
      - onlyrealcuzzo 4y ago
        Why make a profit when you can pay your employees >100% of your revenue and just go into debt instead? It's not how business works. You hire people if you need people, and you pay them the least you can get away with, so you maximize profits - because long ago, you raised money with the promise to the people you raised the money from that you would do this, and you have a Fiduciary obligation to do so...
        coldpie 4y ago
        > you pay them the least you can get away with, so you maximize profits We agree then that employees should put in the least amount of work that they can get away with, right? Fair's fair.
macintux 4y ago
Extensive discussion yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750
sbarre 4y ago
They're spreading it out over the full year. Interesting that they would announce it up front like this? What does this do to morale and retention?
- mynameisvlad 4y ago
  IIRC, Salesforce also did the same thing. Announced layoffs that would happen over the course of a year, with some effective immediately. It feels like it would demoralize workers; everyone was already on eggshells leading up to such an announcement and it would suck to continue working while stepping on eggshells for a full year, wondering if tomorrow is your day.
  - kypro 4y ago
    I've seen both. Imo announcing layoffs ahead of time is better because while demoralising it at least gives people time to prepare and a sense that the company cares enough about you to be honest with you and aid with a smooth transition to your next role. I worked for place which did several mass layoffs. The way they did it was by emailing everyone at end of day Thursday explain that everyone needed to be in the office at 9am tomorrow. Then the next day they'd call people into rooms one by one and tell them they no longer have a job. It sucks for two reasons, one because in the span of 24 hours you go from feeling secure to panicking about finding a job. And two because everyone who is still there knows that at any point the same thing could happen to them. The places I've been where they've been up front have been much more pleasant in comparison. While people can feel stressed and demoralised they at least know where they stand and can keep their options open. Managers come across as honest and sympathetic to the situation instead of secretive which helps avoid rumours of impending mass layoffs every couple of months. Plus it also gives everyone a chance to say goodbye.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - x86x87 4y ago
      Nah. Corpos are not people. Announcing it like this has 1 purpose and 1 purpose only: to extract more work from the drones by instilling fear.
Sebb767 4y ago
While there is no good way to do a mass-layoff, I don't particularly like the way this was communicated. There's a lot of flowery language and the fact that there will be massive layoffs is only said in passing in the third paragraph. This will never be good news, obviously, but please communicate the important facts clearly.
- hprotagonist 4y ago
  10k is ~5% of FTEs. Not nothing, but not 20%, either.
  - bennyelv 4y ago
    It would be interesting to see how it compares to the average natural employee churn in a year - I expect it is significantly less.
- jsiepkes 4y ago
  The only honest thing he could have said would be: "Look, in the end this about shareholder value and we need to sacrifice some people in order to create shareholder value. I know, it sucks, but let's not kid ourselves, we all knew that's the game we are playing here at Microsoft (or any publicly traded company). We got some nice perks while it lasted but unfortunately the party is over now. We will do our best to ensure everyone affected gets a fair severance package.". Anything else is basically a lie.
  - willcipriano 4y ago
    I'd add "Signed, A shareholder"
  - WastingMyTime89 4y ago
    To be honest, it's more like: "Look, investors have low confidence in the market right now and all our competitors are doing it. I need to send a signal or the stock is going to keep going down and I wont get my full yearly bonus. In the end it's all about the quaterly share price. I know, it sucks, but let's not kid ourselves, we all knew that's the game we are playing here: go work for a small company if you want long term strategy. We might buy you when you are done innovating. You can always come back next year if it's a hiring market anyway."
ninethirty 4y ago
Back during the great depression, Milton Hershey went to great lengths to not have to fire his employees. Those days are looooooong gone.
- KWxIUElW8Xt0tD9 4y ago
  HP did this back in the 80s also, we were working 9 of 10 days to avoid layoffs
  - roflyear 4y ago
    Yeah. Companies used to grant you leave or organize otherwise rather than a straight layoff.
  - Tiktaalik 4y ago
    The Ontario government did something like this during the recession in the 80s. There were "Rae Days" a dozen forced unpaid days off for the public service to both save money and jobs, named after the premier of the time, Bob Rae. Rae Days were reviled and helped end the viability of Rae's party the Ontario NDP. The thing is... I don't get it? Would people have rather had mass layoffs? Rae 100% did the right thing here IMO.
    - ckdarby 4y ago
      Yes. There are always those taking advantage of any system and those being cheated by those taking advantage. In the above those being cheated are actually hit twice vs if you layoff those trying to take advantage of the system the cheated get double benefits.
    - andromeduck 4y ago
      He was a good interim leader - would have done better than Trudeau IMO.
farseer 4y ago
How many of those would be H1B workers?
jsiepkes 4y ago
Satya is appointed by shareholders, not by employees. Employees can't fire Satya. And while employees might give him a hard time for this, shareholders can definitely give him a harder time if they see a (potential) decline in dividend. So cutting cost to keep dividends steady with a decline in profitability and revenue is the easiest fight for him. While it sucks, when working for a large tech company which is publicly traded like Microsoft antics like this should be no surprise to anyone.
- stevefan1999 4y ago
  so you mean hes an agent of blackrock all this time
- aaomidi 4y ago
  Employees can strike. Let’s see how fast the stock tanks then :)
  - vrc 4y ago
    They won’t.
  - gfo 4y ago
    Most employees at tech firms, Microsoft included, are awash in their employer's stock. It's not in their best interest to intentionally tank the stock.
  - wittycardio 4y ago
    [dead]
  - Espressosaurus 4y ago
    Tech workers as a population are rather anti-union. Things need to get a lot worse before most will get on board with one, unfortunately. Everybody thinks they're a special snowflake getting one over on the company.
- MuffinFlavored 4y ago
  > shareholders can definitely give him a harder time What's the worst they can do? Fire him? He's worth somewhere between $300m-$800m according to Google. Even if he's "only" worth $100m. He'll never have to worry about providing/monthly expenses to cover rent/food. Can't say the same for employees. Obviously that's not his responsibility/concern. Just an interesting take. What's harder? Getting squeezed by shareholders or being unable to afford your rent?
college_physics 4y ago
There was a sentiment in an earlier discussion [0] that this is "a war on tech wages" but for years the argument was that tech will make many other jobs obsolete (which would justify wage growth for tech employees). Remember, e.g., the Jack Ma era and his proclamations that we should all get into arts because tech will take care of the rest? Is the current round of layoffs an admission that the "software will eat the world" scenario will not happen or an indication that it can be done with even fewer tech employees? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750
- lbotos 4y ago
  It’s been said time and time again. During growth, you make big plans and you invest in growth. You hire people to build new things. Oh snap. Growth is gone. You cancel your lofty plans and you stick with things that are working. Anyone who was hired for grand plan things is a burden and let go. Sure. Some under performers too, but I don’t think this current wave in the cycle is the end of software eating the world.
  - JackFr 4y ago
    When money is cheap it makes sense to invest in low ROI ideas. When monety stops being cheap it makes sense to stop.
    - 3-cheese-sundae 4y ago
      But money is still cheap, at least in the US. The US inflation rate was 6.5% at the end of 2022, and the interest rate was 4.5%. It's just not as cheap.
      - iLemming 4y ago
        The inflation rate in 2020 was 1.4. And MSFT is laying off less than 5% of its workforce.
- jstx1 4y ago
anthomtb 4y ago
Is Microsoft laying off executives too? Or will this only affect the rank and file? IME, if the company does not let go of executives, they are just tagging along with their peer companies on the layoff train. If they do make cuts at the VP/SVP level then the company really does have margin/profitability issues.
- jonathankoren 4y ago
  They’re laying people off because it’s cool to lay people off. Layoffs are social, not economical. https://news.stanford.edu/2022/12/05/explains-recent-tech-layoffs-worried/ https://news.stanford.edu/2022/12/05/explains-recent-tech-la...
  - incrudible 4y ago
    If the evidence suggested that periodic layoffs are good for company longevity and profit margins, you can bet that none of these academics would shout it from the rooftops. Moreover, none of the evidence was collected under the current economic environment, where a decade of cheap money and growth fantasies have fueled an unsustainable hiring frenzy.
    - notfromhere 4y ago
      It's a social exercise at companies like Microsoft. You lay people off because you are expected to lay people off, hell you'll look irresponsible for not laying people off. We're gonna sit here and pretend that Microsoft, a company that printed $72B in net income last fiscal year somehow needs to lay off 10k workers to survive?
      - ckdarby 4y ago
        Survive, no. Blackberry is still surviving. Thrive, yes. It is one of the factors that allowed them over time to get to $72B in net income.
      - incrudible 4y ago
cokeandpepsi 4y ago
Would be cool if it got up to 100% one day
- x86x87 4y ago
  Nope. In the "good old days" corpos got thay a move like this would kill morale. Nowadays in the "you should be grateful you have a job" days corpos no longer care. It's great because they can squeeze more work from the people left behind and they also have flexibility when it comes to opportunistically shedding workers around key date (ie earnings)
ketchupdebugger 4y ago
All the news is saying that its a mild recession but layoffs is a longer term solution in cost reduction. Basically Big Tech isn't optimistic about the industry for at least 2023. Is the recession going to be worse than we expect?
- ActionHank 4y ago
  It seems like tech companies are being more severe with their layoffs because they were over aggressive with hiring during the pandemic. Many went through a massive surge in demand which they either thought was going to be permanent or had to hire to keep the machine moving.
  - astrea 4y ago
    I keep hearing this, and I would love to believe it, but does anyone have a concrete source that confirms this is the case?
    - Espressosaurus 4y ago
      https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/MSFT/microsoft/number-of-employees https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/MSFT/microsoft/num... 163K employees in 2020 to 220K employees in 2022. And they're on the low of the hiring boom.
      - nerdjon 4y ago
        Wait so these layoffs are still only a smallish part of the employees added over the next couple years? While obviously bad that seems like... as far as speaking for the entire tech industry not really that bad? Do you know if the other big tech layoffs followed a similar pattern. Or am I missing something here.
- culi 4y ago
  The inflation rate has decreased 7 months in a row now. The yield curve is still inverted but... less inverted? S&P 500 is not falling through the floor and even making slow and steady gains. GDP is still growing. I get we're uncharted territories with the negative interest rates we're seeing in other countries, but who exactly is bold enough to predict a recession? If anything it just seems like uncertainty in general
ausbah 4y ago
i just hit 6 months as a new grad today, wonderful coincidence. severance is very good, but not laying everyone off at once is torment
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
O__________O 4y ago
Interview with Microsoft’s CEO was posted by WSJ within past 24-hours that includes questions about if workers should be concerned about AI taking their jobs. My understanding was he expected companies to retrain their workforce to leverage AI. I would be super curious to hear his reasoning for why Microsoft did not take his own advice. Satya Nadella: Microsoft's Products Will Soon Access Open AI Tools Like ChatGPT | WSJ - YouTube https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UNbyT7wPwk4 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UNbyT7wPwk4
- omnicognate 4y ago
  > Microsoft did not take his own advice. This assumes AI taking people's jobs has anything to do with these layoffs. The press release mentions AI, but not in that context. I don't think these people are being laid off because MS is getting ChatGPT to write their code instead.
  - O__________O 4y ago
    Understand your response, though my understanding is he meant AI would enable employees to be retrained using AI to create more value — not that the employees would be replaced by AI; meaning even a non-tech employee would become a tech employee using AI and as a result would become valuable enough not to fire After being retrained.
- vi2837 4y ago
  Yeah, they want lay off workers because they need money for making big investment in ChatGPT :)
AlbertCory 4y ago
I tried a few cards of CorpSpeak Bingo on this (https://1fish2.github.io/buzzword-bingo/corp-bingo.html https://1fish2.github.io/buzzword-bingo/corp-bingo.html) One of my cards was SO CLOSE, but he needed to galvanize some. My rightmost column had Leadership, Accelerate, Innovative, and Challenge. Missing Galvanize.
bork1 4y ago
Seems predictable that this announcement would come right after switching to unlimited PTO. I would imagine this reduces the money that the company plans to pay out by quite a bit if they used to pay outgoing employees for unused PTO. Maybe I'm being unnecessarily cynical, though.
- bhouston 4y ago
  I think it is more about the employees who stay. Giving unlimited PTO is a way to make the remaining employees more happy. So it is like a way to try to balance out the negative effects of the layoff on team moral...
  - moneywoes 4y ago
    Does it really make remaining employees unhappy when people are less likely to claim PTO and don’t get pay outs after firing
  - not_the_fda 4y ago
    There is nothing unlimited about unlimited PTO. Its a removal of a paid benefit. When they let you go they don't have to pay for accrued PTO. There is no contract stating how much PTO you can take, its up to your manager, could be zero, could be four weeks, who knows. Could change when your manager changes. Its an accounting trick to remove PTO from the accounting books and remove a paid benefit to employees.
  - dubbel 4y ago
    Are people still happy about unlimited PTO being introduced? I thought it was shown that it reduces the average PTO taken.
    - munchbunny 4y ago
      It's mixed. From my personal observations the more junior folks and the people less up to date on the discourse around unlimited PTO are happier, but people who are aware of the knock-on effects on company culture, pressure to deliver, etc. are unhappy.
nateb2022 4y ago
Past discussion (21 hours ago): Microsoft to lay off 11k employees, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750
DarkNova6 4y ago
> Could there be a tech recession? Yes. Was there a bubble in valuations? Absolutely. Did Meta overhire? Probably. I'm glad we agree > But is that why they are laying people off? Of course not. Meta has plenty of money. These companies are all making money. How does this follow any logic at all. He does not even dispute that overhiring took place. Should companies continue with a stupid hiring frenzy until they run out of money? This is the logical implication. > They are doing it because other companies are doing it. How is this explanation better than any other? This is such a strong claim and he offers ZERO evidence for it. And gross overgeneralizations like "oh, there are cases in which..." are argumental rubbish. This infuriates me because this is bad science and plainly opinionated.
- aeze 4y ago
  I think you may be unintentionally misinterpreting some of the items you've quoted. 1) Layoffs != Hiring frenzy. A company can slow or stop hiring but also not do layoffs. It's actually a common way to downsize softly. 2) Most of these companies are profitable. Running out of money isn't likely.
  - DarkNova6 4y ago
    No, I don't think so. 1) I really have no issues with layoff in Big Tech. They pay very very well and no parent who was let go can't feed his family all of a sudden. If you were even a semi-decent employee, you can find a job at another place quickly. So many places still look for people in spades. There are as many good business reasons to contract your workforce, as there are bad ones. And it's likely you hired a lot of low-performers and quacks during peak hiring. Now is the time to do so without creating public outrage. 2) This implies that the reason for layoffs are exclusively linked to payrolls. And the guy in the interview suggest as much as well. I dispute this notion.
- SahAssar 4y ago
  What are you quoting? Neither this thread nor the article says these quotes.
  - 4y ago
1970-01-01 4y ago
Good luck everyone! There's always https://news.ycombinator.com/jobs https://news.ycombinator.com/jobs
lloydatkinson 4y ago
Now would be a bad idea to apply then...
sharadov 4y ago
The best explanation I've read so far, layoffs are more a sign of "social contagion" and "copycat " behavior rather than based on sound economic reasons. https://news.stanford.edu/2022/12/05/explains-recent-tech-layoffs-worried/ https://news.stanford.edu/2022/12/05/explains-recent-tech-la...
Olumde 4y ago
It was only in May last year that Mr Nadella announced a pay rise for MS staff in order to stay competitive i.e. keep them from being poached by Meta etc. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/16/microsoft-ceo-satya-nadella-tells-employees-pay-increases-coming.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/16/microsoft-ceo-satya-nadella-...
devinprater 4y ago
I hope they're not laying off the accessibility team. Windows is rough as it is.
Kukumber 4y ago
another episode of: "let's fire some innocent workers to save the ass of these execs and managers"

346 points by dola 4y ago

If you can fire 10,000 people that easily then you have far too many employees

MSFT manager of 25+ person team here with no actual heads up on this. The writing has been on the wall for months though from internal comms so this should come as a surprise to no one. No one on my team has any information about this beyond the Satya email, so this is either a "no news is good news" situation (assuming you don't actually want to be laid off), or a poorly executed process. I'm hoping for the former for the sake of my team.

brink 4y ago
If he gave managers a heads up, it would have been immediately leaked to the press.
- sbarre 4y ago
  Becoming a manager in large enterprise companies is basically an entry-level position all over again.. Except people care even less about your job experience since you're "leadership" now and are expected to toe the line no matter what.
  - ddalex 4y ago
    At faangs not even directors get a head up before the night before on plans. The only ones that can set strategy are VPs and above.
  - vishnugupta 4y ago
    Truer words have not been spoken. Can confirm from my experience.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- activitypea 4y ago
  Good thing it didn't leak then, huh
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- x86x87 4y ago
  Lol. This was floating on Blind for at least 2-3 days.
  - dehrmann 4y ago
    Blind has predicted 5 of the last 3 layoffs.
    - x86x87 4y ago
      That's why as a journalist you cannot use it a legit source. But usually you get an advanced warning. This comes with the cost of the paranoia induced by seeing the corporate underbelly
  - kerpotgh 4y ago
    So the weekly layoffs thread is right sometimes!
photonbeam 4y ago
> The writing has been on the wall for months though from internal comms What did the hints look like?
- rk06 4y ago
  Cost cutting. Move to floating desk and reduction in building space. There were few more things. But the shift to floating seats was a big indicator that serious cost cutting is happening. And everyone guessed that layoffs are next. I am based in India. US folks would have seen different signs
- w0m 4y ago
  Stock went from 350 to 250.
  - mandeepj 4y ago
    > Stock went from 350 to 250 It went to 350 from 30
- JackFr 4y ago
  Not sure here, but in my experience no backfill hires for voluntary leavers is a pretty good warning.
  - smugma 4y ago
    Other companies stopped backfilling a while ago but doesn't mean they plan on laying people off (and you can look at 2008-2010 for reference to see that some companies didn't backfill but didn't have layoffs). Not over-growing and then shrinking through attrition is one way to rightsize a company in tougher times.
    - JackFr 4y ago
      Absolutely - but absent corporate communications saying "Everything is great" or "OMG we're doomed.", it's a very relevant data point.
- 4y ago
wyldfire 4y ago
I always assumed that the disclosure rules for publicly traded companies would require them not to give anyone notice in advance of the public.
- joshribakoff 4y ago
  Not true. Companies share material non public information internally. What they do is they have blackout periods where you cant trade the stock, and constant reminders not to trade based upon material non public information (insider trading) Tl;DR = possessing insider info != insider trading Generally speaking, with a layoff, they want all employees to hear it from official sources and not internal rumors.
zelos 4y ago
> ...with some notifications happening today. I guess there are complexities with huge multinational companies, but that seems kind of designed to make people like your team worry.
- aeyes 4y ago
  It's designed so that no one can be blamed because you never know who took the decision and that no one has a chance to speak up against it. My understanding is also that during mass layoffs big companiess can't just cut all low performers / juniors so this might be completely random but we just don't get to know that.
winReInstall 4y ago
How can you actually signal you want to be laid off? Is that something you say when the news goes out? Loads of "NoFuture" cooperate punk in the FAMG. Monopoly does not make the work interesting.
- pjc50 4y ago
  In places where a "consultation process" is legally mandated, that's one of the things you get to discuss. In UK redundancies I have been asked "do you want to take voluntary redundancy?"
  - NGRhodes 4y ago
    > "do you want to take voluntary redundancy?" That seems like a trick question to me.
wnolens 4y ago
At least you got an email from Satya. Amazon folks need to stumble across major news outlets.
- verst 4y ago
  Major news came yesterday. Satya email this morning.
verst 4y ago
I know some teams who had a sudden team meeting scheduled by their skip manager for 9 am today. I suspect this is how organization changes will be communicated to affected teams.
petilon 4y ago
It is a poorly executed process: "... the reduction of our overall workforce by 10,000 jobs through the end of FY23 Q3". So employees will have to live with uncertainty for the next three months!
- Prolixium 4y ago
  Maybe they /want/ to see some increase in attrition due to the uncertainty. It's a very rough way of going about that, though.
  - jjeaff 4y ago
    That seems like a bad strategy since employees that are most in demand will be the first to find another job and leave.
  - peanuty1 4y ago
    Why would you quit when you'd get severance if you're laid off?
- jjtheblunt 4y ago
  Maybe some employees are told the project or division they work on will shut down months from now, so start looking internally for transfers?
- pyuser583 4y ago
  All employees get 60 days notice, so it seems like there will be 30 days of uncertainty. Maybe I'm optimistic.
  - petilon 4y ago
    That's not how it works. You won't be told 60 days before you are let go. You will be let go and then given pay for 60 days.
    - sangnoir 4y ago
mym1990 4y ago
Can you give an example of what a broadly speaking internal comm(not anything specific to MSFT) would look like that might be a red flag for future layoffs?

jstx1 4y ago

> When I think about this moment in time, the start of 2023, it’s showtime – for our industry and for Microsoft. He could have left that part out.

alex_suzuki 4y ago
Yeah, way to rub it in. Just weird.
mc32 4y ago
It echoes of Steve Ballmer. I hate it when head honchoes try and get cozy with you by signing off with their First Name only --way to take the name away from anyone else in the company with the same name. 99% of the people in a large company like that never met you and don't know you on a first-name basis.
- mathieuh 4y ago
  It's an attempted mind fuck to disguise the true power dynamic. If they say "we're making cuts, you're done. Leave your laptop on your desk and clear off", it's clear what the power dynamic is. Instead they present themselves as your friend. Even if you don't believe it, social norms dictate that in general you act like you do. Like Zizek says, "fuck you, you're a boss, act like it!". Then you're unsure of what's happening. Do they really feel bad? Maybe they're trying their best, maybe they really care about me personally. It's same with all this corporate-speech that's been emerging recently. They're not your family, they're not your friends, and if it comes to it they will fist you so hard you'll be tasting their perfectly-manicured nails. I think it's very important to always have this in mind and not to tie up your identity with your work. You are a line item on a spreadsheet somewhere to them, nothing more. If you start believing otherwise you are setting yourself up for mental health problems when your use runs out and they kick you to the kerb.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
joewhale 4y ago

ChuckNorris89 4y ago

>U.S.-benefit-eligible employees will receive a variety of benefits, including above-market severance pay, continuing healthcare coverage for six months, continued vesting of stock awards for six months, career transition services, and 60 days’ notice prior to termination, regardless of whether such notice is legally required. Wow, that way way, better than what we get by law in my EU country when you're laid off (just unemployment benefits). Looks like big tech in the US has loads of perks.

bratao 4y ago
Legit question, don't EU have by law, very generous unemployment benefits compared to the US?
- melenaboija 4y ago
  It depends on what you understand with very generous unemployment benefits. Te me just the fact that there is universal healthcare makes the unemployment benefits way better. I am a EU citizen having lived in the US for almost a decade and I still can't overcome the stress of losing my job because of this.
  - prottog 4y ago
    With the higher salary in the US, especially as a software engineer, you could easily put a little bit aside to pay for a healthcare exchange plan for a while if you do ever lose your job.
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  Depends on the EU country. Where I live you get 60% of your pay for something like 6 months, plus the public healthcare coverage. Though, it's not exactly a vacation, as you're expected to prove to the unemployment office you are actively looking for a job and interviewing and you're not allowed to leave the country during that period. I mean you can leave the country, nobody will stop you, but you'll not receive unemployment or healthcare coverage for the period you're out of the country. You can make it a vacation if you're system savvy enough and know how to game the system and aren't risk averse.

whatever1 4y ago

Families will get torn apart, people with health issues will be on their own, immigrants will get booted. C-suite will get a raise from the stock price bump. Congrats on our system.

jarym 4y ago
The Federal Reserve wants to tame inflation by cooling the economy. I don't believe that historically that has ever been achieved without causing unemployment to rise. These large companies are ultimately doing what the Fed wants them to do, no point blaming the c-suite for that?
- malcolmgreaves 4y ago
  They could all take massive pay cuts to preserve jobs. They have agency and they have chosen to enrich their stock price at the expense of people’s lives and well being.
  - shiftingleft 4y ago
    Microsoft net income 2022: ~$70B. Why force pay cuts or fire workers when you have roughly $300k of net income per employee to work with?
    - onlyrealcuzzo 4y ago
      Why make a profit when you can pay your employees >100% of your revenue and just go into debt instead? It's not how business works. You hire people if you need people, and you pay them the least you can get away with, so you maximize profits - because long ago, you raised money with the promise to the people you raised the money from that you would do this, and you have a Fiduciary obligation to do so...
      - coldpie 4y ago
        > you pay them the least you can get away with, so you maximize profits We agree then that employees should put in the least amount of work that they can get away with, right? Fair's fair.

macintux 4y ago

Extensive discussion yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750

sbarre 4y ago

They're spreading it out over the full year. Interesting that they would announce it up front like this? What does this do to morale and retention?

mynameisvlad 4y ago
IIRC, Salesforce also did the same thing. Announced layoffs that would happen over the course of a year, with some effective immediately. It feels like it would demoralize workers; everyone was already on eggshells leading up to such an announcement and it would suck to continue working while stepping on eggshells for a full year, wondering if tomorrow is your day.
- kypro 4y ago
  I've seen both. Imo announcing layoffs ahead of time is better because while demoralising it at least gives people time to prepare and a sense that the company cares enough about you to be honest with you and aid with a smooth transition to your next role. I worked for place which did several mass layoffs. The way they did it was by emailing everyone at end of day Thursday explain that everyone needed to be in the office at 9am tomorrow. Then the next day they'd call people into rooms one by one and tell them they no longer have a job. It sucks for two reasons, one because in the span of 24 hours you go from feeling secure to panicking about finding a job. And two because everyone who is still there knows that at any point the same thing could happen to them. The places I've been where they've been up front have been much more pleasant in comparison. While people can feel stressed and demoralised they at least know where they stand and can keep their options open. Managers come across as honest and sympathetic to the situation instead of secretive which helps avoid rumours of impending mass layoffs every couple of months. Plus it also gives everyone a chance to say goodbye.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - x86x87 4y ago
    Nah. Corpos are not people. Announcing it like this has 1 purpose and 1 purpose only: to extract more work from the drones by instilling fear.

Sebb767 4y ago

While there is no good way to do a mass-layoff, I don't particularly like the way this was communicated. There's a lot of flowery language and the fact that there will be massive layoffs is only said in passing in the third paragraph. This will never be good news, obviously, but please communicate the important facts clearly.

hprotagonist 4y ago
10k is ~5% of FTEs. Not nothing, but not 20%, either.
- bennyelv 4y ago
  It would be interesting to see how it compares to the average natural employee churn in a year - I expect it is significantly less.
jsiepkes 4y ago
The only honest thing he could have said would be: "Look, in the end this about shareholder value and we need to sacrifice some people in order to create shareholder value. I know, it sucks, but let's not kid ourselves, we all knew that's the game we are playing here at Microsoft (or any publicly traded company). We got some nice perks while it lasted but unfortunately the party is over now. We will do our best to ensure everyone affected gets a fair severance package.". Anything else is basically a lie.
- willcipriano 4y ago
  I'd add "Signed, A shareholder"
- WastingMyTime89 4y ago
  To be honest, it's more like: "Look, investors have low confidence in the market right now and all our competitors are doing it. I need to send a signal or the stock is going to keep going down and I wont get my full yearly bonus. In the end it's all about the quaterly share price. I know, it sucks, but let's not kid ourselves, we all knew that's the game we are playing here: go work for a small company if you want long term strategy. We might buy you when you are done innovating. You can always come back next year if it's a hiring market anyway."

ninethirty 4y ago

Back during the great depression, Milton Hershey went to great lengths to not have to fire his employees. Those days are looooooong gone.

KWxIUElW8Xt0tD9 4y ago
HP did this back in the 80s also, we were working 9 of 10 days to avoid layoffs
- roflyear 4y ago
  Yeah. Companies used to grant you leave or organize otherwise rather than a straight layoff.
- Tiktaalik 4y ago
  The Ontario government did something like this during the recession in the 80s. There were "Rae Days" a dozen forced unpaid days off for the public service to both save money and jobs, named after the premier of the time, Bob Rae. Rae Days were reviled and helped end the viability of Rae's party the Ontario NDP. The thing is... I don't get it? Would people have rather had mass layoffs? Rae 100% did the right thing here IMO.
  - ckdarby 4y ago
    Yes. There are always those taking advantage of any system and those being cheated by those taking advantage. In the above those being cheated are actually hit twice vs if you layoff those trying to take advantage of the system the cheated get double benefits.
  - andromeduck 4y ago
    He was a good interim leader - would have done better than Trudeau IMO.

farseer 4y ago

How many of those would be H1B workers?

jsiepkes 4y ago

Satya is appointed by shareholders, not by employees. Employees can't fire Satya. And while employees might give him a hard time for this, shareholders can definitely give him a harder time if they see a (potential) decline in dividend. So cutting cost to keep dividends steady with a decline in profitability and revenue is the easiest fight for him. While it sucks, when working for a large tech company which is publicly traded like Microsoft antics like this should be no surprise to anyone.

stevefan1999 4y ago
so you mean hes an agent of blackrock all this time
aaomidi 4y ago
Employees can strike. Let’s see how fast the stock tanks then :)
- vrc 4y ago
  They won’t.
- gfo 4y ago
  Most employees at tech firms, Microsoft included, are awash in their employer's stock. It's not in their best interest to intentionally tank the stock.
- wittycardio 4y ago
  [dead]
- Espressosaurus 4y ago
  Tech workers as a population are rather anti-union. Things need to get a lot worse before most will get on board with one, unfortunately. Everybody thinks they're a special snowflake getting one over on the company.
MuffinFlavored 4y ago
> shareholders can definitely give him a harder time What's the worst they can do? Fire him? He's worth somewhere between $300m-$800m according to Google. Even if he's "only" worth $100m. He'll never have to worry about providing/monthly expenses to cover rent/food. Can't say the same for employees. Obviously that's not his responsibility/concern. Just an interesting take. What's harder? Getting squeezed by shareholders or being unable to afford your rent?

college_physics 4y ago

There was a sentiment in an earlier discussion [0] that this is "a war on tech wages" but for years the argument was that tech will make many other jobs obsolete (which would justify wage growth for tech employees). Remember, e.g., the Jack Ma era and his proclamations that we should all get into arts because tech will take care of the rest? Is the current round of layoffs an admission that the "software will eat the world" scenario will not happen or an indication that it can be done with even fewer tech employees? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750

lbotos 4y ago
It’s been said time and time again. During growth, you make big plans and you invest in growth. You hire people to build new things. Oh snap. Growth is gone. You cancel your lofty plans and you stick with things that are working. Anyone who was hired for grand plan things is a burden and let go. Sure. Some under performers too, but I don’t think this current wave in the cycle is the end of software eating the world.
- JackFr 4y ago
  When money is cheap it makes sense to invest in low ROI ideas. When monety stops being cheap it makes sense to stop.
  - 3-cheese-sundae 4y ago
    But money is still cheap, at least in the US. The US inflation rate was 6.5% at the end of 2022, and the interest rate was 4.5%. It's just not as cheap.
    - iLemming 4y ago
      The inflation rate in 2020 was 1.4. And MSFT is laying off less than 5% of its workforce.
jstx1 4y ago

anthomtb 4y ago

Is Microsoft laying off executives too? Or will this only affect the rank and file? IME, if the company does not let go of executives, they are just tagging along with their peer companies on the layoff train. If they do make cuts at the VP/SVP level then the company really does have margin/profitability issues.

jonathankoren 4y ago
They’re laying people off because it’s cool to lay people off. Layoffs are social, not economical. https://news.stanford.edu/2022/12/05/explains-recent-tech-layoffs-worried/ https://news.stanford.edu/2022/12/05/explains-recent-tech-la...
- incrudible 4y ago
  If the evidence suggested that periodic layoffs are good for company longevity and profit margins, you can bet that none of these academics would shout it from the rooftops. Moreover, none of the evidence was collected under the current economic environment, where a decade of cheap money and growth fantasies have fueled an unsustainable hiring frenzy.
  - notfromhere 4y ago
    It's a social exercise at companies like Microsoft. You lay people off because you are expected to lay people off, hell you'll look irresponsible for not laying people off. We're gonna sit here and pretend that Microsoft, a company that printed $72B in net income last fiscal year somehow needs to lay off 10k workers to survive?
    - ckdarby 4y ago
      Survive, no. Blackberry is still surviving. Thrive, yes. It is one of the factors that allowed them over time to get to $72B in net income.
    - incrudible 4y ago

cokeandpepsi 4y ago

Would be cool if it got up to 100% one day

x86x87 4y ago
Nope. In the "good old days" corpos got thay a move like this would kill morale. Nowadays in the "you should be grateful you have a job" days corpos no longer care. It's great because they can squeeze more work from the people left behind and they also have flexibility when it comes to opportunistically shedding workers around key date (ie earnings)

ketchupdebugger 4y ago

All the news is saying that its a mild recession but layoffs is a longer term solution in cost reduction. Basically Big Tech isn't optimistic about the industry for at least 2023. Is the recession going to be worse than we expect?

ActionHank 4y ago
It seems like tech companies are being more severe with their layoffs because they were over aggressive with hiring during the pandemic. Many went through a massive surge in demand which they either thought was going to be permanent or had to hire to keep the machine moving.
- astrea 4y ago
  I keep hearing this, and I would love to believe it, but does anyone have a concrete source that confirms this is the case?
  - Espressosaurus 4y ago
    https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/MSFT/microsoft/number-of-employees https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/MSFT/microsoft/num... 163K employees in 2020 to 220K employees in 2022. And they're on the low of the hiring boom.
    - nerdjon 4y ago
      Wait so these layoffs are still only a smallish part of the employees added over the next couple years? While obviously bad that seems like... as far as speaking for the entire tech industry not really that bad? Do you know if the other big tech layoffs followed a similar pattern. Or am I missing something here.
culi 4y ago
The inflation rate has decreased 7 months in a row now. The yield curve is still inverted but... less inverted? S&P 500 is not falling through the floor and even making slow and steady gains. GDP is still growing. I get we're uncharted territories with the negative interest rates we're seeing in other countries, but who exactly is bold enough to predict a recession? If anything it just seems like uncertainty in general

ausbah 4y ago

i just hit 6 months as a new grad today, wonderful coincidence. severance is very good, but not laying everyone off at once is torment

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

O__________O 4y ago

Interview with Microsoft’s CEO was posted by WSJ within past 24-hours that includes questions about if workers should be concerned about AI taking their jobs. My understanding was he expected companies to retrain their workforce to leverage AI. I would be super curious to hear his reasoning for why Microsoft did not take his own advice. Satya Nadella: Microsoft's Products Will Soon Access Open AI Tools Like ChatGPT | WSJ - YouTube https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UNbyT7wPwk4 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UNbyT7wPwk4

omnicognate 4y ago
> Microsoft did not take his own advice. This assumes AI taking people's jobs has anything to do with these layoffs. The press release mentions AI, but not in that context. I don't think these people are being laid off because MS is getting ChatGPT to write their code instead.
- O__________O 4y ago
  Understand your response, though my understanding is he meant AI would enable employees to be retrained using AI to create more value — not that the employees would be replaced by AI; meaning even a non-tech employee would become a tech employee using AI and as a result would become valuable enough not to fire After being retrained.
vi2837 4y ago
Yeah, they want lay off workers because they need money for making big investment in ChatGPT :)

AlbertCory 4y ago

I tried a few cards of CorpSpeak Bingo on this (https://1fish2.github.io/buzzword-bingo/corp-bingo.html https://1fish2.github.io/buzzword-bingo/corp-bingo.html) One of my cards was SO CLOSE, but he needed to galvanize some. My rightmost column had Leadership, Accelerate, Innovative, and Challenge. Missing Galvanize.

bork1 4y ago

Seems predictable that this announcement would come right after switching to unlimited PTO. I would imagine this reduces the money that the company plans to pay out by quite a bit if they used to pay outgoing employees for unused PTO. Maybe I'm being unnecessarily cynical, though.

bhouston 4y ago
I think it is more about the employees who stay. Giving unlimited PTO is a way to make the remaining employees more happy. So it is like a way to try to balance out the negative effects of the layoff on team moral...
- moneywoes 4y ago
  Does it really make remaining employees unhappy when people are less likely to claim PTO and don’t get pay outs after firing
- not_the_fda 4y ago
  There is nothing unlimited about unlimited PTO. Its a removal of a paid benefit. When they let you go they don't have to pay for accrued PTO. There is no contract stating how much PTO you can take, its up to your manager, could be zero, could be four weeks, who knows. Could change when your manager changes. Its an accounting trick to remove PTO from the accounting books and remove a paid benefit to employees.
- dubbel 4y ago
  Are people still happy about unlimited PTO being introduced? I thought it was shown that it reduces the average PTO taken.
  - munchbunny 4y ago
    It's mixed. From my personal observations the more junior folks and the people less up to date on the discourse around unlimited PTO are happier, but people who are aware of the knock-on effects on company culture, pressure to deliver, etc. are unhappy.

nateb2022 4y ago

Past discussion (21 hours ago): Microsoft to lay off 11k employees, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34417750

DarkNova6 4y ago

> Could there be a tech recession? Yes. Was there a bubble in valuations? Absolutely. Did Meta overhire? Probably. I'm glad we agree > But is that why they are laying people off? Of course not. Meta has plenty of money. These companies are all making money. How does this follow any logic at all. He does not even dispute that overhiring took place. Should companies continue with a stupid hiring frenzy until they run out of money? This is the logical implication. > They are doing it because other companies are doing it. How is this explanation better than any other? This is such a strong claim and he offers ZERO evidence for it. And gross overgeneralizations like "oh, there are cases in which..." are argumental rubbish. This infuriates me because this is bad science and plainly opinionated.

aeze 4y ago
I think you may be unintentionally misinterpreting some of the items you've quoted. 1) Layoffs != Hiring frenzy. A company can slow or stop hiring but also not do layoffs. It's actually a common way to downsize softly. 2) Most of these companies are profitable. Running out of money isn't likely.
- DarkNova6 4y ago
  No, I don't think so. 1) I really have no issues with layoff in Big Tech. They pay very very well and no parent who was let go can't feed his family all of a sudden. If you were even a semi-decent employee, you can find a job at another place quickly. So many places still look for people in spades. There are as many good business reasons to contract your workforce, as there are bad ones. And it's likely you hired a lot of low-performers and quacks during peak hiring. Now is the time to do so without creating public outrage. 2) This implies that the reason for layoffs are exclusively linked to payrolls. And the guy in the interview suggest as much as well. I dispute this notion.
SahAssar 4y ago
What are you quoting? Neither this thread nor the article says these quotes.
- 4y ago

1970-01-01 4y ago

Good luck everyone! There's always https://news.ycombinator.com/jobs https://news.ycombinator.com/jobs

lloydatkinson 4y ago

Now would be a bad idea to apply then...

sharadov 4y ago

The best explanation I've read so far, layoffs are more a sign of "social contagion" and "copycat " behavior rather than based on sound economic reasons. https://news.stanford.edu/2022/12/05/explains-recent-tech-layoffs-worried/ https://news.stanford.edu/2022/12/05/explains-recent-tech-la...

Olumde 4y ago

It was only in May last year that Mr Nadella announced a pay rise for MS staff in order to stay competitive i.e. keep them from being poached by Meta etc. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/16/microsoft-ceo-satya-nadella-tells-employees-pay-increases-coming.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/16/microsoft-ceo-satya-nadella-...

devinprater 4y ago

I hope they're not laying off the accessibility team. Windows is rough as it is.

Kukumber 4y ago

another episode of: "let's fire some innocent workers to save the ass of these execs and managers"