56 ms·

The real question is: does the CEO take full responsibility?

by voytec 4y ago

NotYourLawyer 4y ago
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=u48vYSLvKNQ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=u48vYSLvKNQ
- nicbou 4y ago
  I expected the "we're sorry" clip from South Park.
jay-barronville 4y ago
Lol! Questions that need answers . . .
scarface74 4y ago
I don’t get this mentality. From a meta level, Confluent isn’t profitable. In this environment, what would you have Confluent to do? The second point, a job is always transactional, you exchange labor for money and at any given time, either party can stop that transaction Also, if you are a tech person in any major city in the US, you are more than likely making at least twice the median wage in that city. If others can survive making half of what you’re making, you should be able to save enough to weather a brief storm. Of course I understand things are different if you are here on H1B.
- RohMin 4y ago
  Empathy for those laid off shouldn't vary based on visa status. These are real people losing their jobs, searching for another job in an already saturated market.
  - harvey9 4y ago
    I don't think they meant different empathy, just visa holders have fewer options around getting a new job
  - idopmstuff 4y ago
    I completely disagree. Not all job losses are the same, and visa status makes an enormous difference in the consequences of losing one's job. I've been laid off. At the time, I had plenty of savings and nobody depending on me besides my dog. I took some time off and was later able to find a new job. The company didn't have any H-1Bs at the time, but if it did they certainly would've been in a much worse situation than I was and clearly more deserving of empathy.
    - RohMin 4y ago
      I feel that the original post rubbed me the wrong way. The whole "others have it worse, so toughen up" doesn't serve to help anyone.
      - scarface74 4y ago
        When I was laid off, I had four months worth of savings and could have scraped by longer. No matter how much money that my coworkers had that are here on H1B, they had to find a job no matter what. Did you feel any empathy when the Disney CEO was fired with a multi million dollar severance package? Things are different for different people.
- cfltlayoffs 4y ago
  Based on the people I know who work at Confluent, the messaging at all hands meetings has been that the market conditions didn't affect staffing plans. Employees make decisions based on the expectation of ongoing employment - if the CEO keeps says "we won't do layoffs" and then you buy a house and get laid off, that seems like detrimental reliance. It's also worth noting many places enshrine in law protections for layoffs because of the power imbalance between employees and employers.
  - sidlls 4y ago
    One should never assume anything about his employment status other than that it can end at any moment. Companies’ management might have empathy, but as a rule they absolutely don’t care about employees.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    > Employees make decisions based on the expectation of ongoing employment Then again outside of visa holders they are naive. I’ve been working professionally for 25+ years and there isn’t a day after my first year after I built up savings that I depended on my employer instead of my employability to support my addiction to food and shelter. In the case of Confluent, who depends on a non profitable company to be a sustainable place of unemployment? You go in knowing that any given day that you are going to be laid off and save accordingly. And no when I graduated from college I wasn’t making an above average salary. I started out making $30K and found the cheapest apartment I could until I saved money.
- kibwen 4y ago
  Responsibility would mean cutting executive compensation. If the executives are choosing to inflict suffering on anyone but themselves, that's not responsibility, that's crocodile tears.
- PuppyTailWags 4y ago
  should be able to save enough to weather a brief storm is a huge assumption. What do you do if you have dependents or complex medical needs personally? What happens if you have a personal emergency during your job search? What do you do if you have existing debt from a previous emergency, medical crisis, etc?
  - andsoitis 4y ago
    While what you describe are serious problems and would be very anxiety inducing for many (most?), the truth remains that it isn't someone else's problem or responsibility.
    - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
      I'm not ascribing anything but to say that people who are laid off deserve sympathy because you cannot assume their personal circumstances surrounding the layoff. I have no dependents so it doesn't matter to me. My friend's wife is only able to work because of his healthcare, and if she loses his healthcare even if he finds a new job quickly his new health insurance will force the wife into a nightmare of proving she's sick enough to get her medicine again, putting her out of work.
      - andsoitis 4y ago
        That’s very very unfortunate and warrants sympathy for sure. At the same time, one’s employer isn’t the one responsible for securing your financial stability or future.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    > What do you do if you have dependents or complex medical needs personally You get COBRA through your former employer. Been there done that. I had a pre-existing condition that I couldn’t get health insurance individually (pre-ACA) > What happens if you have a personal emergency during your job search? What do you do if you have existing debt from a previous emergency, medical crisis, etc? You talk to the people and make arrangements or you just don’t pay them until you can afford to. Your priority becomes house, food, shelter, car. How do you think people making much less than tech workers handle it?
- unity1001 4y ago
  > The second point, a job is always transactional Precisely. Corporations made jobs always transactional. Now the employees and the public are making corporations transactional by affording them no sympathy or loyalty whatsoever.
- markus_zhang 4y ago
  As long as CXO takes real responsibility by cutting their salary to a significant percentage and refusing stock refreshers (or whatever called) I'm fine. By saying "I take full responsibility" but still maintains the original pay is not convincing. Since tech CXOs usually take very large stock and cash compensations (well into multi-millions), just imagine how much cost can be saved by cutting all CXO compensation by 50%. The company can also initiate a vote of all employees to remove this cut of CXO compensations, so that if CXO is really doing well overall I'm sure he will be recognized and his compensation defended by the whole company.
- gorbachev 4y ago
  I make a mistake, I get fired. CEO makes a mistake, I get laid off. CEO takes full responsibility.
  - gfodor 4y ago
    Layoffs don't prove the CEO made a mistake. Understaffing and overstaffing are both errors. A small layoff when the SHTF shows they at least didn't understaff. If you're a growing startup in ZIRP, understaffing is arguably a bigger error than overstaffing, up to a point. I have no idea if Confluent overstaffed. I admit I'm surprised to hear they aren't profitable though.
    - haspok 4y ago
      > Layoffs don't prove the CEO made a mistake That is irrelevant, since they are taking full responsibility anyway, right? Just kidding.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    And complaining about life not being “fair” is a waste of my energy.
andsoitis 4y ago
The CEO's job (responsibility) is not to give people jobs, but to steer a company for success on behalf of the owners. If your comment ("CEO takes full responsibility") is suggesting s/he should be fired or compensation reduced because of their misread of the future, that would be quite silly. Companies don't fire people for making mistakes (in fact if you make no mistakes you probably should be let go because you're not pushing the boundaries enough or taking sufficient risk). Reducing comp as punishment would also not make sense, for obvious reasons.
- juujian 4y ago
  I think you should get your sarcasm detector checked. He was referring to the recent surge of empty CEO statements built around the "full responsibility" cliche.
  - andsoitis 4y ago
    Sure, but when you look at the history of comments around this theme (CEO, layoffs), it seems pretty clear that people want a CEO to take responsibility in some other way that laying off staff.
    - brazzledazzle 4y ago
      I can't speak for everyone else but a lot of what I've seen is mockery of a meaningless statement that would have been better left unsaid.
      - andsoitis 4y ago
        Perhaps, but scanning the conversation thread here again, I see most people wanting to punish the CEO for steering the ship for a new reality in a way that includes layoffs.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- flanked-evergl 4y ago
the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
> The responsibility for that falls squarely on me [Jay]. https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/CONFLUENT-INC-124047168/news/Confluent-Message-to-Confluent-Employees-from-Jay-Kreps-Form-8-K-42820152/ https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/CONFLUENT-INC-124...
- throwaway5959 4y ago
  Responsibility without consequences is meaningless.
f6v 4y ago
I mean, it’s a funny joke. But this attitude only upsets people who thought jobs were not transactional. Kind of reminds me of stories by people who paid for sex and found out the sex worker didn’t want to cuddle afterwards.
- lanternfish 4y ago
  Someone could have an entirely transactional understanding of their job but assume that - alongside many implicit elements of that transaction - there's a component of through-line longevity.
- toxican 4y ago
  I mean it's not like the sex worker spends the entire session talking about how they're all in it together and they're a team and then at the end releases a public statement about how difficult the decision not to cuddle was for them.
  - poszlem 4y ago
    Except the sex workers often literally offer the girlfriend experience, which is, arguably, exactly that, a "make believe" relationship for some agreed time.
    - maerF0x0 4y ago
      Thank God they don't use the 'We're family" angle like companies do ... xD NB: I'm just playing along for fun, never been involved in any way with sex work or sex workers.
- triceratops 4y ago
  > But this attitude only upsets people who thought jobs were not transactional It's entirely possible to believe your job is transactional while expecting accountability for all underperforming colleagues, at all levels. Rather than just the rank-and-file.
  - 4y ago
scotty79 4y ago
Too bad full doesn't include financial.
- Moto7451 4y ago
  Some of these “fully responsible” CEOs are going to end up triggering bonuses based on performance at the end of this year. The lip service is strong but the reality is disconnected from these layoffs’ messaging. A company I consult for is decidedly guilty of this. Not one month ago it was blue skys and calm waters. This week? “Full responsibility.” Did they get their end of 2022 bonuses? Absolutely. I fail to see how the first two weeks of 2023 could be so different from the last two of 2022. That’s because they had this in the planning stage for a while.
pjc50 4y ago
Reminds me of https://ourincrediblejourney.tumblr.com/ https://ourincrediblejourney.tumblr.com/ : the cliche is that "our incredible journey" means "we are being bought out and our product will be deleted"
Jensson 4y ago
The CEO take full credit for the layoffs, that is what they mean when they say they take full responsibility. In the eyes of those who matter to the CEO the layoff is a good thing, who would want that credit to trickle down the ranks to the middle managers?
spaceman_2020 4y ago
If employees were being encouraged to jump ship every 3-6 months for a pay raise during the pandemic, why should companies show any loyalty to them either?
- sattoshi 4y ago
  If employees can jump for a significant pay raise en-mass, the companies weren’t showing loyalty to begin with.

The real question is: does the CEO take full responsibility?

by voytec 4y ago

The real question is: does the CEO take full responsibility?

NotYourLawyer 4y ago

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=u48vYSLvKNQ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=u48vYSLvKNQ

nicbou 4y ago
I expected the "we're sorry" clip from South Park.

jay-barronville 4y ago

Lol! Questions that need answers . . .

scarface74 4y ago

I don’t get this mentality. From a meta level, Confluent isn’t profitable. In this environment, what would you have Confluent to do? The second point, a job is always transactional, you exchange labor for money and at any given time, either party can stop that transaction Also, if you are a tech person in any major city in the US, you are more than likely making at least twice the median wage in that city. If others can survive making half of what you’re making, you should be able to save enough to weather a brief storm. Of course I understand things are different if you are here on H1B.

RohMin 4y ago
Empathy for those laid off shouldn't vary based on visa status. These are real people losing their jobs, searching for another job in an already saturated market.
- harvey9 4y ago
  I don't think they meant different empathy, just visa holders have fewer options around getting a new job
- idopmstuff 4y ago
  I completely disagree. Not all job losses are the same, and visa status makes an enormous difference in the consequences of losing one's job. I've been laid off. At the time, I had plenty of savings and nobody depending on me besides my dog. I took some time off and was later able to find a new job. The company didn't have any H-1Bs at the time, but if it did they certainly would've been in a much worse situation than I was and clearly more deserving of empathy.
  - RohMin 4y ago
    I feel that the original post rubbed me the wrong way. The whole "others have it worse, so toughen up" doesn't serve to help anyone.
    - scarface74 4y ago
      When I was laid off, I had four months worth of savings and could have scraped by longer. No matter how much money that my coworkers had that are here on H1B, they had to find a job no matter what. Did you feel any empathy when the Disney CEO was fired with a multi million dollar severance package? Things are different for different people.
cfltlayoffs 4y ago
Based on the people I know who work at Confluent, the messaging at all hands meetings has been that the market conditions didn't affect staffing plans. Employees make decisions based on the expectation of ongoing employment - if the CEO keeps says "we won't do layoffs" and then you buy a house and get laid off, that seems like detrimental reliance. It's also worth noting many places enshrine in law protections for layoffs because of the power imbalance between employees and employers.
- sidlls 4y ago
  One should never assume anything about his employment status other than that it can end at any moment. Companies’ management might have empathy, but as a rule they absolutely don’t care about employees.
- scarface74 4y ago
  > Employees make decisions based on the expectation of ongoing employment Then again outside of visa holders they are naive. I’ve been working professionally for 25+ years and there isn’t a day after my first year after I built up savings that I depended on my employer instead of my employability to support my addiction to food and shelter. In the case of Confluent, who depends on a non profitable company to be a sustainable place of unemployment? You go in knowing that any given day that you are going to be laid off and save accordingly. And no when I graduated from college I wasn’t making an above average salary. I started out making $30K and found the cheapest apartment I could until I saved money.
kibwen 4y ago
Responsibility would mean cutting executive compensation. If the executives are choosing to inflict suffering on anyone but themselves, that's not responsibility, that's crocodile tears.
PuppyTailWags 4y ago
should be able to save enough to weather a brief storm is a huge assumption. What do you do if you have dependents or complex medical needs personally? What happens if you have a personal emergency during your job search? What do you do if you have existing debt from a previous emergency, medical crisis, etc?
- andsoitis 4y ago
  While what you describe are serious problems and would be very anxiety inducing for many (most?), the truth remains that it isn't someone else's problem or responsibility.
  - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
    I'm not ascribing anything but to say that people who are laid off deserve sympathy because you cannot assume their personal circumstances surrounding the layoff. I have no dependents so it doesn't matter to me. My friend's wife is only able to work because of his healthcare, and if she loses his healthcare even if he finds a new job quickly his new health insurance will force the wife into a nightmare of proving she's sick enough to get her medicine again, putting her out of work.
    - andsoitis 4y ago
      That’s very very unfortunate and warrants sympathy for sure. At the same time, one’s employer isn’t the one responsible for securing your financial stability or future.
- scarface74 4y ago
  > What do you do if you have dependents or complex medical needs personally You get COBRA through your former employer. Been there done that. I had a pre-existing condition that I couldn’t get health insurance individually (pre-ACA) > What happens if you have a personal emergency during your job search? What do you do if you have existing debt from a previous emergency, medical crisis, etc? You talk to the people and make arrangements or you just don’t pay them until you can afford to. Your priority becomes house, food, shelter, car. How do you think people making much less than tech workers handle it?
unity1001 4y ago
> The second point, a job is always transactional Precisely. Corporations made jobs always transactional. Now the employees and the public are making corporations transactional by affording them no sympathy or loyalty whatsoever.
markus_zhang 4y ago
As long as CXO takes real responsibility by cutting their salary to a significant percentage and refusing stock refreshers (or whatever called) I'm fine. By saying "I take full responsibility" but still maintains the original pay is not convincing. Since tech CXOs usually take very large stock and cash compensations (well into multi-millions), just imagine how much cost can be saved by cutting all CXO compensation by 50%. The company can also initiate a vote of all employees to remove this cut of CXO compensations, so that if CXO is really doing well overall I'm sure he will be recognized and his compensation defended by the whole company.
gorbachev 4y ago
I make a mistake, I get fired. CEO makes a mistake, I get laid off. CEO takes full responsibility.
- gfodor 4y ago
  Layoffs don't prove the CEO made a mistake. Understaffing and overstaffing are both errors. A small layoff when the SHTF shows they at least didn't understaff. If you're a growing startup in ZIRP, understaffing is arguably a bigger error than overstaffing, up to a point. I have no idea if Confluent overstaffed. I admit I'm surprised to hear they aren't profitable though.
  - haspok 4y ago
    > Layoffs don't prove the CEO made a mistake That is irrelevant, since they are taking full responsibility anyway, right? Just kidding.
- scarface74 4y ago
  And complaining about life not being “fair” is a waste of my energy.

andsoitis 4y ago

The CEO's job (responsibility) is not to give people jobs, but to steer a company for success on behalf of the owners. If your comment ("CEO takes full responsibility") is suggesting s/he should be fired or compensation reduced because of their misread of the future, that would be quite silly. Companies don't fire people for making mistakes (in fact if you make no mistakes you probably should be let go because you're not pushing the boundaries enough or taking sufficient risk). Reducing comp as punishment would also not make sense, for obvious reasons.

juujian 4y ago
I think you should get your sarcasm detector checked. He was referring to the recent surge of empty CEO statements built around the "full responsibility" cliche.
- andsoitis 4y ago
  Sure, but when you look at the history of comments around this theme (CEO, layoffs), it seems pretty clear that people want a CEO to take responsibility in some other way that laying off staff.
  - brazzledazzle 4y ago
    I can't speak for everyone else but a lot of what I've seen is mockery of a meaningless statement that would have been better left unsaid.
    - andsoitis 4y ago
      Perhaps, but scanning the conversation thread here again, I see most people wanting to punish the CEO for steering the ship for a new reality in a way that includes layoffs.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
flanked-evergl 4y ago

the_mitsuhiko 4y ago

> The responsibility for that falls squarely on me [Jay]. https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/CONFLUENT-INC-124047168/news/Confluent-Message-to-Confluent-Employees-from-Jay-Kreps-Form-8-K-42820152/ https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/CONFLUENT-INC-124...

throwaway5959 4y ago
Responsibility without consequences is meaningless.

f6v 4y ago

I mean, it’s a funny joke. But this attitude only upsets people who thought jobs were not transactional. Kind of reminds me of stories by people who paid for sex and found out the sex worker didn’t want to cuddle afterwards.

lanternfish 4y ago
Someone could have an entirely transactional understanding of their job but assume that - alongside many implicit elements of that transaction - there's a component of through-line longevity.
toxican 4y ago
I mean it's not like the sex worker spends the entire session talking about how they're all in it together and they're a team and then at the end releases a public statement about how difficult the decision not to cuddle was for them.
- poszlem 4y ago
  Except the sex workers often literally offer the girlfriend experience, which is, arguably, exactly that, a "make believe" relationship for some agreed time.
  - maerF0x0 4y ago
    Thank God they don't use the 'We're family" angle like companies do ... xD NB: I'm just playing along for fun, never been involved in any way with sex work or sex workers.
triceratops 4y ago
> But this attitude only upsets people who thought jobs were not transactional It's entirely possible to believe your job is transactional while expecting accountability for all underperforming colleagues, at all levels. Rather than just the rank-and-file.
- 4y ago

scotty79 4y ago

Too bad full doesn't include financial.

Moto7451 4y ago
Some of these “fully responsible” CEOs are going to end up triggering bonuses based on performance at the end of this year. The lip service is strong but the reality is disconnected from these layoffs’ messaging. A company I consult for is decidedly guilty of this. Not one month ago it was blue skys and calm waters. This week? “Full responsibility.” Did they get their end of 2022 bonuses? Absolutely. I fail to see how the first two weeks of 2023 could be so different from the last two of 2022. That’s because they had this in the planning stage for a while.

pjc50 4y ago

Reminds me of https://ourincrediblejourney.tumblr.com/ https://ourincrediblejourney.tumblr.com/ : the cliche is that "our incredible journey" means "we are being bought out and our product will be deleted"

Jensson 4y ago

The CEO take full credit for the layoffs, that is what they mean when they say they take full responsibility. In the eyes of those who matter to the CEO the layoff is a good thing, who would want that credit to trickle down the ranks to the middle managers?

spaceman_2020 4y ago

If employees were being encouraged to jump ship every 3-6 months for a pay raise during the pandemic, why should companies show any loyalty to them either?

sattoshi 4y ago
If employees can jump for a significant pay raise en-mass, the companies weren’t showing loyalty to begin with.