4 ms·

In your opinion what is the proper way to do a layoff? Or if any layoff is a problem, how do you prevent companies from hiring too quickly or whatever?

by wilg 3y ago

tdb7893 3y ago
They are making over a billion a week in profits (and still growing). Layoffs can be justified but it's a bit of a head scratcher to be doing them when the company seems to be doing generally well
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- wilg 3y ago
  IMHO Google's a hot mess top-to-bottom at the moment.
- bogomipz 3y ago
  I feel like this has been a theme for the last year - big tech companies with big profits doing mass layoffs. We've seen Microsoft, Facebook, Goggle, Spotify etc all do this. It's this whole obsession with the word "efficiency" and the phrase "doing more with less." It really makes you think these CEOs are all a bunch of sheep. See: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/11/techs-new-business-model-do-more-with-less-.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/11/techs-new-business-model-do-...
  - tdb7893 3y ago
    The craziest thing to me is that the employees at these companies are some of the most sought after people yet when push comes to shove they seem to have all just rolled over and not raised a fuss with layoffs. These companies are some of the most profitable companies of all time. It's not like I think everyone needs to run out and join a union but the seeming complete lack of torches and pitchforks internally is a huge shock to me. My dad was in a different field and when the company he worked for did layoffs the company was in a serious financial state and in danger of just folding entirely and also the employees had a say in how layoffs were implemented. Until I started working in tech I had assumed that was the norm but now I realize that that amount of respect for the employees from leadership was the exception (at least at large companies).
    - sulam 3y ago
      You answered this yourself. These people got new jobs. What's to raise a fuss about?
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      These are some pretty luxurious layoffs by comparison, I think. Generally the benefits packages are excellent.
thanhhaimai 3y ago
Layoff should be done with a large cut, but one round. If done right, it gives people the motivation to turn things around. Multiple rounds of layoff in a short amount of time (multiple rounds per year for example) gives the signal that the management can't figure out what is needed to turn the company around. At that time, your bests and brightests will leave.
- mschuster91 3y ago
  > At that time, your bests and brightests will leave. The best and brightest will start looking for greener grass the second the first layoff round hits, no matter what. Companies that offload the risk of bad management decisions to employees instead of investors are not any employee's friend.
JKCalhoun 3y ago
I had an interesting thought: what if hiring were like bringing a child into your family. No, no layoffs ever. It's the equivalent of disowning your own child. If the company begins to sink, so be it, the whole family goes down together (or flee as they see fit). It would make a company hesitant to hire — they would have to think very long term making a decision like that. Perhaps companies would train (re-train) their employees if the jobs or company evolve. Interesting though that, in the U.S. at least, the relationship we have with our employer is perhaps 180 degrees from that of the relationship we have with our family. That seems a little sad. (Reminded suddenly of Tim's speech at the end of The Office (U.K.) — pass me a hanky. https://youtu.be/5AlZ-ZYbbPU https://youtu.be/5AlZ-ZYbbPU)
- kaashif 3y ago
  Then that country would become an extremely unattractive place to hire employees. Massive incentive to do whatever you can to only use contractors or whatever. Somehow classify your employees as self employed, something like that. Maybe it wouldn't even be a loophole: everyone would just have to actually go freelance and have no employee protections. I wonder if any country has anything close to layoffs being illegal and how that went.
  - StableAlkyne 3y ago
    > Then that country would become an extremely unattractive place to hire employees Works fine for France, it's very hard to do layoffs there, to the point that a common myth is that they're illegal there. 7th largest GDP. Unemployment rate is at 7% (about 2x the USA), but it's also not the existential risk it is in the US - you are given 75% of whatever your pay was for up to 2-3 years. > Massive incentive to do whatever you can to only use contractors or whatever. Somehow classify your employees as self employed, something like that. Going back to France, they'll fine the hell out of a company that did that. Misclassifying your employees to abuse the system is enforced there. As an American, I am extremely jealous of France's employee protections. Even the most leftist states like CA pale in comparison to the protections the French have.
    - 3y ago
snotrockets 3y ago
Start at the top.
- wilg 3y ago
  In all cases?

In your opinion what is the proper way to do a layoff? Or if any layoff is a problem, how do you prevent companies from hiring too quickly or whatever?

by wilg 3y ago

In your opinion what is the proper way to do a layoff? Or if any layoff is a problem, how do you prevent companies from hiring too quickly or whatever?

tdb7893 3y ago

They are making over a billion a week in profits (and still growing). Layoffs can be justified but it's a bit of a head scratcher to be doing them when the company seems to be doing generally well

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
wilg 3y ago
IMHO Google's a hot mess top-to-bottom at the moment.
bogomipz 3y ago
I feel like this has been a theme for the last year - big tech companies with big profits doing mass layoffs. We've seen Microsoft, Facebook, Goggle, Spotify etc all do this. It's this whole obsession with the word "efficiency" and the phrase "doing more with less." It really makes you think these CEOs are all a bunch of sheep. See: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/11/techs-new-business-model-do-more-with-less-.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/11/techs-new-business-model-do-...
- tdb7893 3y ago
  The craziest thing to me is that the employees at these companies are some of the most sought after people yet when push comes to shove they seem to have all just rolled over and not raised a fuss with layoffs. These companies are some of the most profitable companies of all time. It's not like I think everyone needs to run out and join a union but the seeming complete lack of torches and pitchforks internally is a huge shock to me. My dad was in a different field and when the company he worked for did layoffs the company was in a serious financial state and in danger of just folding entirely and also the employees had a say in how layoffs were implemented. Until I started working in tech I had assumed that was the norm but now I realize that that amount of respect for the employees from leadership was the exception (at least at large companies).
  - sulam 3y ago
    You answered this yourself. These people got new jobs. What's to raise a fuss about?
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    These are some pretty luxurious layoffs by comparison, I think. Generally the benefits packages are excellent.

thanhhaimai 3y ago

Layoff should be done with a large cut, but one round. If done right, it gives people the motivation to turn things around. Multiple rounds of layoff in a short amount of time (multiple rounds per year for example) gives the signal that the management can't figure out what is needed to turn the company around. At that time, your bests and brightests will leave.

mschuster91 3y ago
> At that time, your bests and brightests will leave. The best and brightest will start looking for greener grass the second the first layoff round hits, no matter what. Companies that offload the risk of bad management decisions to employees instead of investors are not any employee's friend.

JKCalhoun 3y ago

I had an interesting thought: what if hiring were like bringing a child into your family. No, no layoffs ever. It's the equivalent of disowning your own child. If the company begins to sink, so be it, the whole family goes down together (or flee as they see fit). It would make a company hesitant to hire — they would have to think very long term making a decision like that. Perhaps companies would train (re-train) their employees if the jobs or company evolve. Interesting though that, in the U.S. at least, the relationship we have with our employer is perhaps 180 degrees from that of the relationship we have with our family. That seems a little sad. (Reminded suddenly of Tim's speech at the end of The Office (U.K.) — pass me a hanky. https://youtu.be/5AlZ-ZYbbPU https://youtu.be/5AlZ-ZYbbPU)

kaashif 3y ago
Then that country would become an extremely unattractive place to hire employees. Massive incentive to do whatever you can to only use contractors or whatever. Somehow classify your employees as self employed, something like that. Maybe it wouldn't even be a loophole: everyone would just have to actually go freelance and have no employee protections. I wonder if any country has anything close to layoffs being illegal and how that went.
- StableAlkyne 3y ago
  > Then that country would become an extremely unattractive place to hire employees Works fine for France, it's very hard to do layoffs there, to the point that a common myth is that they're illegal there. 7th largest GDP. Unemployment rate is at 7% (about 2x the USA), but it's also not the existential risk it is in the US - you are given 75% of whatever your pay was for up to 2-3 years. > Massive incentive to do whatever you can to only use contractors or whatever. Somehow classify your employees as self employed, something like that. Going back to France, they'll fine the hell out of a company that did that. Misclassifying your employees to abuse the system is enforced there. As an American, I am extremely jealous of France's employee protections. Even the most leftist states like CA pale in comparison to the protections the French have.
  - 3y ago

snotrockets 3y ago

Start at the top.

wilg 3y ago
In all cases?