3 ms·
Over a quarter of the company (ignoring any hiring they may have done since September) though? idk, I'm not sure it's that clear-cut. Not that I'm certain in m
by OJFord 4y ago
Over a quarter of the company (ignoring any hiring they may have done since September) though? idk, I'm not sure it's that clear-cut.
Not that I'm certain in my own opinion and disagreeing with you though - I only said 'maybe they thought'.
- purpleblue 4y agoThis is a well-known thing, people aren't guessing here and there's nothing to dispute. Having multiple layoffs destroys morale and the best practice is to cut deeply once to avoid a second layoff. Anyone who doesn't believe this is simply and foolishly repeating the mistakes of the past. Which suggests to me that it was a surprise to even themselves that they had to do this because of a revenue shortfall.