4 ms·

It might be better if you didn't over hire. I can't speak for MSFT. But a lot of tech companies definitely hired to banana town. Cutting would be better than

It might be better if you didn't over hire. I can't speak for MSFT. But a lot of tech companies definitely hired to banana town. Cutting would be better than freezing salaries.

mc32 4y ago
Hiring gives someone experience they sought and presumably would not have had (else they might have kept put). So overhiring in some light does look bad, on the other hand it gives some people the necessary experience for their next step in their carrers.
- echelon 4y ago
  > So overhiring in some light does look bad, on the other hand it gives some people the necessary experience for their next step in their carrers. Not if they were let go before their first year, which has been the case at a lot of tech companies recently. New hires, juniors especially, need a lot of time to onboard. Lessons in the first weeks and months of a new job will be more about company-specific tooling and minutiae, not engineering in the broader scope. Portable lessons come later, usually after you've found your legs.
afavour 4y ago
> Cutting would be better than freezing salaries. Surely that depends on whether you're one of those getting cut or not.
geodel 4y ago
Yes a lot of companies hired a lot more. A lot of money also got distributed in this process which otherwise wouldn't have. Laid off employees got some work experience out of it. Better than nothing. I don't get this stuck up argument again and again Why did they hire before? As if there is some really great answer that can reveal itself by repeatedly asking this question. > Cutting would be better than freezing salaries. Many would like same or lower salary than being laid off. Those who looking for higher salaries can move on just like they always have.
- throw8383833jj 4y ago
  i thought the answer was Jack welch philosophy of management: always overhire and then prune 10% of your workforce every year. the theorey goes that way, you keep the best and loose the rest. But, that assumes that employees are interchangable like cogs which isn't true. plus, most companies aren't necessarily able to determine who's best and worst and may even end up laying off those who are better.
wintogreen74 4y ago
They hired with someone else's money though, now they're looking to cut when it's their own.

It might be better if you didn't over hire. I can't speak for MSFT. But a lot of tech companies definitely hired to banana town. Cutting would be better than freezing salaries.

mc32 4y ago

Hiring gives someone experience they sought and presumably would not have had (else they might have kept put). So overhiring in some light does look bad, on the other hand it gives some people the necessary experience for their next step in their carrers.

echelon 4y ago
> So overhiring in some light does look bad, on the other hand it gives some people the necessary experience for their next step in their carrers. Not if they were let go before their first year, which has been the case at a lot of tech companies recently. New hires, juniors especially, need a lot of time to onboard. Lessons in the first weeks and months of a new job will be more about company-specific tooling and minutiae, not engineering in the broader scope. Portable lessons come later, usually after you've found your legs.

afavour 4y ago

> Cutting would be better than freezing salaries. Surely that depends on whether you're one of those getting cut or not.

geodel 4y ago

Yes a lot of companies hired a lot more. A lot of money also got distributed in this process which otherwise wouldn't have. Laid off employees got some work experience out of it. Better than nothing. I don't get this stuck up argument again and again Why did they hire before? As if there is some really great answer that can reveal itself by repeatedly asking this question. > Cutting would be better than freezing salaries. Many would like same or lower salary than being laid off. Those who looking for higher salaries can move on just like they always have.

throw8383833jj 4y ago
i thought the answer was Jack welch philosophy of management: always overhire and then prune 10% of your workforce every year. the theorey goes that way, you keep the best and loose the rest. But, that assumes that employees are interchangable like cogs which isn't true. plus, most companies aren't necessarily able to determine who's best and worst and may even end up laying off those who are better.

wintogreen74 4y ago

They hired with someone else's money though, now they're looking to cut when it's their own.