5 ms·

There should be some kind of legal restrictions against opportunistically laying off thousands of staff for no good reason. Maybe something like, in order to do

There should be some kind of legal restrictions against opportunistically laying off thousands of staff for no good reason. Maybe something like, in order to do so, the entire C-suite would be legally required to resign.

YetAnotherNick 3y ago
The biggest factor why Europe's tech salary is half to one third after accounting for cost of living is regulation. Even after someone works for one year of every one year laid off, the person will earn more in US.
- lifestyleguru 3y ago
  The workers in Europe can be fired with equal ease, even in countries like Germany. If the HR and management want one out, one is out. The labour code will only be followed if one is quick enough to hire a lawyer. Is is worth the massive paycut the Europeans are accepting?
  - ThePhysicist 3y ago
    Once you reach a certain size it's quite complicated to let people go, if you need to fire a large amount of people you need to e.g. work out a social plan, you can't fire performance-based unless people grossly neglect their job responsibilities. For smaller companies with less than a few hundred employees it's easier of course, but once you're in unionized territory firing becomes a process that the management needs to work out with the employee board.
  - sausagefeet 3y ago
    It is factually true that a company can come to you and claim you are fired and have to leave, however it is illegal. One does not need to be quick with a lawyer. If you are a developer in Sweden, and you have joined the Swedish software engineering union, they will provide you legal support to ensure that you get what the law guarantees you. During the big layoffs this year, they actually waved any prereqs for how long you had to pay dues in the Union to get legal support. The layoffs in Sweden required the company to negotiate with employees for how much money they would accept to leave, in many cases this severance was full salary for a year. I live in Netherlands now and it's the same thing. Yes, a company will make it hard on you but they have no legal status here and will 100% lose going to court. Yes, not everyone has the courage to stand up to their employer, and it may take some time for the legal process to work itself out, and it can be stressful. But the guarantees are there. For myself, as an American who moved to Europe and has stayed, I found my quality of life much better. The reduction in pay has not bothered me one bit.
  - sensanaty 3y ago
    At least in the Netherlands it's extremely difficult to fire someone (which is a good thing). Unless they do something straight up illegal or are proven to be extremely incompetent, the only way to get rid of someone is to wait out their contract, assuming they don't have an unlimited contract. And if they're on the works council (mandatory in any company with at least 50 employees, with more seats the higher the number of employees), it's even more difficult to fire them without a very long, well-kept chain of proof for their incompetency. The employer can always negotiate with the employee if they want them gone sooner, but that's still going to be expensive for the employer, and the worker in this case has much more robust rights than the employer. If my company wanted me gone I could easily get a year's salary out of it with any decent lawyer, as I have a permanent contract. > If the HR and management want one out, one is out. Definitely not in the Netherlands, and I expect most EU countries are similar. > Is is worth the massive paycut the Europeans are accepting? I don't earn anywhere near the 600k number that I see flying around in this thread and elsewhere on HN (which is lunacy to me but more power to you guys), but I'm still better off than 99% of people I meet, have my own home, have actual usable public transport and don't have to worry about a hospital visit bankrupting me. Oh, and my employer can't arbitrarily decide to just fire me, and if they do (for example in a wave of layoffs) I get compensated generously for it, plus the gov't itself will compensate me as well if I can't find a job for whatever reason while having 35 paid vacation days (I think the legal minimum is 25 vacation days for a fulltime employee, not 100% sure on that number though) + 10 or so public holidays. So, yes, definitely worth the pay cut. There's more to life than gross monetary amounts, and from the horror stories my USA-ian friends relay to me about living there, I consider myself quite privileged to be where I'm at.
    - _heimdall 3y ago
      > At least in the Netherlands it's extremely difficult to fire someone (which is a good thing). In your experience, has this led to more careful hiring? One big downside I've seen at some companies in the US is that its so easy to fire someone that companies can tend to hire whoever walks in the door. Especially at larger and publicly traded companies, it can often be more important to fill seats and show company growth when times are good and fire by the thousands at the first sign of any economic issues coming ahead. I don't personally mind it being easy for a company to fire someone as long as that situation is clear before accepting a job, but it would be interesting if we have clear examples of better hiring practices when the employee can't be fired easily.
- podgorniy 3y ago
  What is the justification for this claim beyond simply relying on "common sense"?
  - YetAnotherNick 3y ago
    I just found Europe developers to be very good. So likely it's not a skills issue. But I could be wrong. And for a job like software engineering, skills and regulation should be the only factor for salary of a team as outsourcing is done by everyone.
- arkitaip 3y ago
  Amazing that you see that as a feature and not a horrible bug that causes societal destabilization.
- ThePhysicist 3y ago
  The biggest companies here (e.g. SAP, Zalando, etc.) offer around 50-70 % of equivalent US salaries including stock options, from my experience, at least for the top people. Given that you have way more time off (usually at least 30 days plus 10-12 public holidays), very regulated work hours, great social security and healthcare and very affordable public services like Kindergartens, schools etc. I have to say it seems less and less attractive to move to the US, at last if you have family. As a 20-something year old single it's probably still a great opportunity though.
  - drstewart 3y ago
    What European companies offer $200k+ salaries (which is about 60%-70% of a senior eng salary)? PS - US developers get all of those benefits too, so you're just taking a pay cut for no reason. Not so attractive to me.
    - lifestyleguru 3y ago
      > What European companies offer $200k+ salaries erm... none? the "sky high" threshold in major EU cities is 100k EUR. Zalando and SAP mentioned by OP might pay above 100k but only in Munich or Frankfurt am Main.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - dgellow 3y ago
        They do pay above 100k€ in Berlin for talents.
        mathverse 3y ago
        Yes but then I would need to live in Berlin (shakes uncontrollably).
        lifestyleguru 3y ago
taurath 3y ago
I’d just prefer that companies serve an array of purposes such that it is no longer exclusively about making shareholders as rich as possible. There has to be a better way. If all the actors in an economy act sociopathically, that economy itself is sociopathic. It’s generally seen that totalitarianism is an undesirable state for a government, so why do we accept it from companies?
- dools 3y ago
  Public goods should be provided by the public sector.
- mypastself 3y ago
  Because there is no such thing as a totalitarian company, apart from those owned and operated by the state.
dools 3y ago
No, there should be a job guarantee for anyone unable to find work in the private sector. Asking for profit companies to ensure full employment is a dumb idea. Asking for profit companies to keep people on for any other reason than profitability is a dumb idea. Subsiding companies to keep the jobs is a dumb idea. The only good idea is for the federal government to eliminate involuntary unemployment. The private sector can sort itself out.
- louwrentius 3y ago
  > No, there should be a job guarantee for anyone unable to find work in the private sector. > The only good idea is for the federal government to eliminate involuntary unemployment. The private sector can sort itself out. You are talking about mandatory work camps right?
  - dools 3y ago
    No
- zeroCalories 3y ago
  It's often cheaper to just give welfare than to make up work for people. Furthermore, an Amazon engineer isn't going to be any less stressed about his mortgage if you give him a street cleaning job. If you really want to help people, we need to drastically bring down the cost of living in cities through building more housing, then provide some unemployment or ubi to keep you afloat with your savings while you look for something worthwhile to do.
  - lifestyleguru 3y ago
    > bring down the cost of living in cities through building more housing, Housing is not ruled by the supply and demand wizardry. Housing is subject of infinite cash from fossil fuels, oligarchs, pension funds, dynastic family fortunes, and mortgage leverage by individuals already owning real estate. You build more, more will be purchased and the prices will still grow.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
continuational 3y ago
There are consequences for workers in such a setup as well - namely that companies are more hesitant to hire people if they're too hard to get rid of again.
_heimdall 3y ago
Why do we need laws and law enforcement for this? People don't have to work for a large corporation. If they are uncomfortable with the fact that their employment is at will and can be terminated for any reason, including as part of a mass layoff, work somewhere else or work for yourself. If the company's board doesn't approve of mass layoffs, either don't approve them (if they have that power) or fire the C-suite after the fact. We don't need laws, and therefore larger government control, to fix all our problems. Its concerning to me how frequently the initial reaction to situations like this is "the government should fix this."
bilsbie 3y ago
Making it harder to fire makes it harder to hire.
block_dagger 3y ago
So no more capitalism. Beware slippery slopes.
- oblio 3y ago
  Nordic countries are very capitalistic and yet they have flexible social protections in place. If anything, they're more free market oriented than the US, see Tesla versus IF Metall.
dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
The more restrictions you put on firing people, the less likely employers are likely to hire, given the commitment.

YetAnotherNick 3y ago

The biggest factor why Europe's tech salary is half to one third after accounting for cost of living is regulation. Even after someone works for one year of every one year laid off, the person will earn more in US.

lifestyleguru 3y ago
The workers in Europe can be fired with equal ease, even in countries like Germany. If the HR and management want one out, one is out. The labour code will only be followed if one is quick enough to hire a lawyer. Is is worth the massive paycut the Europeans are accepting?
- ThePhysicist 3y ago
  Once you reach a certain size it's quite complicated to let people go, if you need to fire a large amount of people you need to e.g. work out a social plan, you can't fire performance-based unless people grossly neglect their job responsibilities. For smaller companies with less than a few hundred employees it's easier of course, but once you're in unionized territory firing becomes a process that the management needs to work out with the employee board.
- sausagefeet 3y ago
  It is factually true that a company can come to you and claim you are fired and have to leave, however it is illegal. One does not need to be quick with a lawyer. If you are a developer in Sweden, and you have joined the Swedish software engineering union, they will provide you legal support to ensure that you get what the law guarantees you. During the big layoffs this year, they actually waved any prereqs for how long you had to pay dues in the Union to get legal support. The layoffs in Sweden required the company to negotiate with employees for how much money they would accept to leave, in many cases this severance was full salary for a year. I live in Netherlands now and it's the same thing. Yes, a company will make it hard on you but they have no legal status here and will 100% lose going to court. Yes, not everyone has the courage to stand up to their employer, and it may take some time for the legal process to work itself out, and it can be stressful. But the guarantees are there. For myself, as an American who moved to Europe and has stayed, I found my quality of life much better. The reduction in pay has not bothered me one bit.
- sensanaty 3y ago
  At least in the Netherlands it's extremely difficult to fire someone (which is a good thing). Unless they do something straight up illegal or are proven to be extremely incompetent, the only way to get rid of someone is to wait out their contract, assuming they don't have an unlimited contract. And if they're on the works council (mandatory in any company with at least 50 employees, with more seats the higher the number of employees), it's even more difficult to fire them without a very long, well-kept chain of proof for their incompetency. The employer can always negotiate with the employee if they want them gone sooner, but that's still going to be expensive for the employer, and the worker in this case has much more robust rights than the employer. If my company wanted me gone I could easily get a year's salary out of it with any decent lawyer, as I have a permanent contract. > If the HR and management want one out, one is out. Definitely not in the Netherlands, and I expect most EU countries are similar. > Is is worth the massive paycut the Europeans are accepting? I don't earn anywhere near the 600k number that I see flying around in this thread and elsewhere on HN (which is lunacy to me but more power to you guys), but I'm still better off than 99% of people I meet, have my own home, have actual usable public transport and don't have to worry about a hospital visit bankrupting me. Oh, and my employer can't arbitrarily decide to just fire me, and if they do (for example in a wave of layoffs) I get compensated generously for it, plus the gov't itself will compensate me as well if I can't find a job for whatever reason while having 35 paid vacation days (I think the legal minimum is 25 vacation days for a fulltime employee, not 100% sure on that number though) + 10 or so public holidays. So, yes, definitely worth the pay cut. There's more to life than gross monetary amounts, and from the horror stories my USA-ian friends relay to me about living there, I consider myself quite privileged to be where I'm at.
  - _heimdall 3y ago
    > At least in the Netherlands it's extremely difficult to fire someone (which is a good thing). In your experience, has this led to more careful hiring? One big downside I've seen at some companies in the US is that its so easy to fire someone that companies can tend to hire whoever walks in the door. Especially at larger and publicly traded companies, it can often be more important to fill seats and show company growth when times are good and fire by the thousands at the first sign of any economic issues coming ahead. I don't personally mind it being easy for a company to fire someone as long as that situation is clear before accepting a job, but it would be interesting if we have clear examples of better hiring practices when the employee can't be fired easily.
podgorniy 3y ago
What is the justification for this claim beyond simply relying on "common sense"?
- YetAnotherNick 3y ago
  I just found Europe developers to be very good. So likely it's not a skills issue. But I could be wrong. And for a job like software engineering, skills and regulation should be the only factor for salary of a team as outsourcing is done by everyone.
arkitaip 3y ago
Amazing that you see that as a feature and not a horrible bug that causes societal destabilization.
ThePhysicist 3y ago
The biggest companies here (e.g. SAP, Zalando, etc.) offer around 50-70 % of equivalent US salaries including stock options, from my experience, at least for the top people. Given that you have way more time off (usually at least 30 days plus 10-12 public holidays), very regulated work hours, great social security and healthcare and very affordable public services like Kindergartens, schools etc. I have to say it seems less and less attractive to move to the US, at last if you have family. As a 20-something year old single it's probably still a great opportunity though.
- drstewart 3y ago
  What European companies offer $200k+ salaries (which is about 60%-70% of a senior eng salary)? PS - US developers get all of those benefits too, so you're just taking a pay cut for no reason. Not so attractive to me.
  - lifestyleguru 3y ago
    > What European companies offer $200k+ salaries erm... none? the "sky high" threshold in major EU cities is 100k EUR. Zalando and SAP mentioned by OP might pay above 100k but only in Munich or Frankfurt am Main.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - dgellow 3y ago
      They do pay above 100k€ in Berlin for talents.
      - mathverse 3y ago
        Yes but then I would need to live in Berlin (shakes uncontrollably).
        lifestyleguru 3y ago

taurath 3y ago

I’d just prefer that companies serve an array of purposes such that it is no longer exclusively about making shareholders as rich as possible. There has to be a better way. If all the actors in an economy act sociopathically, that economy itself is sociopathic. It’s generally seen that totalitarianism is an undesirable state for a government, so why do we accept it from companies?

dools 3y ago
Public goods should be provided by the public sector.
mypastself 3y ago
Because there is no such thing as a totalitarian company, apart from those owned and operated by the state.

dools 3y ago

No, there should be a job guarantee for anyone unable to find work in the private sector. Asking for profit companies to ensure full employment is a dumb idea. Asking for profit companies to keep people on for any other reason than profitability is a dumb idea. Subsiding companies to keep the jobs is a dumb idea. The only good idea is for the federal government to eliminate involuntary unemployment. The private sector can sort itself out.

louwrentius 3y ago
> No, there should be a job guarantee for anyone unable to find work in the private sector. > The only good idea is for the federal government to eliminate involuntary unemployment. The private sector can sort itself out. You are talking about mandatory work camps right?
- dools 3y ago
  No
zeroCalories 3y ago
It's often cheaper to just give welfare than to make up work for people. Furthermore, an Amazon engineer isn't going to be any less stressed about his mortgage if you give him a street cleaning job. If you really want to help people, we need to drastically bring down the cost of living in cities through building more housing, then provide some unemployment or ubi to keep you afloat with your savings while you look for something worthwhile to do.
- lifestyleguru 3y ago
  > bring down the cost of living in cities through building more housing, Housing is not ruled by the supply and demand wizardry. Housing is subject of infinite cash from fossil fuels, oligarchs, pension funds, dynastic family fortunes, and mortgage leverage by individuals already owning real estate. You build more, more will be purchased and the prices will still grow.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

continuational 3y ago

There are consequences for workers in such a setup as well - namely that companies are more hesitant to hire people if they're too hard to get rid of again.

_heimdall 3y ago

Why do we need laws and law enforcement for this? People don't have to work for a large corporation. If they are uncomfortable with the fact that their employment is at will and can be terminated for any reason, including as part of a mass layoff, work somewhere else or work for yourself. If the company's board doesn't approve of mass layoffs, either don't approve them (if they have that power) or fire the C-suite after the fact. We don't need laws, and therefore larger government control, to fix all our problems. Its concerning to me how frequently the initial reaction to situations like this is "the government should fix this."

bilsbie 3y ago

Making it harder to fire makes it harder to hire.

block_dagger 3y ago

So no more capitalism. Beware slippery slopes.

oblio 3y ago
Nordic countries are very capitalistic and yet they have flexible social protections in place. If anything, they're more free market oriented than the US, see Tesla versus IF Metall.

dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago

The more restrictions you put on firing people, the less likely employers are likely to hire, given the commitment.