3 ms·

I don't understand why the comments are mostly upset in these cases. If it makes financial sense for you, as an employee, you are free to leave a company. Shoul

I don't understand why the comments are mostly upset in these cases. If it makes financial sense for you, as an employee, you are free to leave a company. Shouldn't companies have the same freedom? Why should the CEO be punished in any way for making such a decision? Having too many people being payed for some time and having to pay severance packages is not enough? What is the moral or legal base for attacking these companies? Honest question.

yakireev 4y ago
> What is the moral or legal base for attacking these companies? Honest question. If an employee leaves Google, Google loses 1/140k = 0.0007% of its workforce, a negligible amount. If Google fires an employee, employee typically loses 100% of their income, which is non-negligible. So, Google firing 12k employees means that twelve thousand people will lose 100% of their income, for the sake of... shareholder interests? Many people see this situation as morally not-okay.
A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
Broadly, yes. The issue appears to be a little more complicated though. There is no clear reason to do any of it beyond 'signalling' to the market that executives are trying to rein in cost in anticipation of what now appears to be almost inevitable recession ( partially because of signalling just like the one from Google ). It is a vicious cycle. I am not upset, but I am not yet personally affected. I also have been saying for a while that low rate encourages unhealthy habits ( including in VC realm ). I guess my beef is that the entire layoff is.. not really necessary?
kazakx 4y ago
The issue is not simple. There are various reasons why people may react negatively to news of layoffs. Some may be angry at upper management for not feeling the impact of the layoffs and still receiving bonuses. Others may be worried about the potential for a recession. Additionally, some people may critique the capitalist system, despite participating in it in their own lives on a smaller scale. And on some level you are completely right as it may be necessary for a private company to occasionally lay off employees, like pruning a tree.

yakireev 4y ago

> What is the moral or legal base for attacking these companies? Honest question. If an employee leaves Google, Google loses 1/140k = 0.0007% of its workforce, a negligible amount. If Google fires an employee, employee typically loses 100% of their income, which is non-negligible. So, Google firing 12k employees means that twelve thousand people will lose 100% of their income, for the sake of... shareholder interests? Many people see this situation as morally not-okay.

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago

Broadly, yes. The issue appears to be a little more complicated though. There is no clear reason to do any of it beyond 'signalling' to the market that executives are trying to rein in cost in anticipation of what now appears to be almost inevitable recession ( partially because of signalling just like the one from Google ). It is a vicious cycle. I am not upset, but I am not yet personally affected. I also have been saying for a while that low rate encourages unhealthy habits ( including in VC realm ). I guess my beef is that the entire layoff is.. not really necessary?

kazakx 4y ago

The issue is not simple. There are various reasons why people may react negatively to news of layoffs. Some may be angry at upper management for not feeling the impact of the layoffs and still receiving bonuses. Others may be worried about the potential for a recession. Additionally, some people may critique the capitalist system, despite participating in it in their own lives on a smaller scale. And on some level you are completely right as it may be necessary for a private company to occasionally lay off employees, like pruning a tree.