4 ms·

eBay Lays Off 9%

29 points by arberx 3y ago

mindslight 3y ago
Severance package was an actual parcel containing live cockroaches and spiders. F-- would not work there again!
- diarrhea 3y ago
  Sorry, but… what?
  - hmcq6 3y ago
    mindslight is referencing this: https://apnews.com/article/ebay-spiders-cockroaches-steiner-newsletter-9ac2c35bcd4c87af181382c71d992343#:~:text=BOSTON%20(AP)%20%E2%80%94%20Online%20retailer,to%20court%20papers%20filed%20Thursday https://apnews.com/article/ebay-spiders-cockroaches-steiner-....
ijhuygft776 3y ago
9% is nothing. how much did they hire last year?
- arberx 3y ago
  You're right, they should do 85% like Twitter!
  - ijhuygft776 3y ago
    but you never see news like "they hired 25% more staff this year"
    - clovoak 3y ago
      Yup. One takeaway I took from the book "Factfulness", is a useful exercise for encountering bad news; ask "would the opposite news have reached me?". The answer is almost certainly, no.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - hmcq6 3y ago
      Because they didn't. According to layoffs.fyi Ebay laid off 200-500 people last year as well. But even if Ebay did go on a hiring kick, is it true that all of those employees had to be laid off? None of them could be retrained? Why is it that so many companies seems to regularly make the *same* mistake of over-hiring and then "needing" to downsize? And if Ebay did a layoff last year why not lay off these people a year ago? Did they miscalculate last year? Was this layoff planned more than a year out? What changed in a year that makes Ebays calculations more accurate now?
      - andsoitis 3y ago
        > Why is it that so many companies seems to regularly make the same mistake of over-hiring and then "needing" to downsize? Perhaps the issue is with the assumption that it is a mistake. Or rather, that it is the kind of mistake that is readily foreseeable or a mistake where incentives didn’t force you “over hire”. When there’s rapid growth the be had, why would you not staff up lest you lose share.
ChrisArchitect 3y ago
[dupe] More: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39111911 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39111911

eBay Lays Off 9%

29 points by arberx 3y ago

mindslight 3y ago

Severance package was an actual parcel containing live cockroaches and spiders. F-- would not work there again!

diarrhea 3y ago
Sorry, but… what?
- hmcq6 3y ago
  mindslight is referencing this: https://apnews.com/article/ebay-spiders-cockroaches-steiner-newsletter-9ac2c35bcd4c87af181382c71d992343#:~:text=BOSTON%20(AP)%20%E2%80%94%20Online%20retailer,to%20court%20papers%20filed%20Thursday https://apnews.com/article/ebay-spiders-cockroaches-steiner-....

ijhuygft776 3y ago

9% is nothing. how much did they hire last year?

arberx 3y ago
You're right, they should do 85% like Twitter!
- ijhuygft776 3y ago
  but you never see news like "they hired 25% more staff this year"
  - clovoak 3y ago
    Yup. One takeaway I took from the book "Factfulness", is a useful exercise for encountering bad news; ask "would the opposite news have reached me?". The answer is almost certainly, no.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - hmcq6 3y ago
    Because they didn't. According to layoffs.fyi Ebay laid off 200-500 people last year as well. But even if Ebay did go on a hiring kick, is it true that all of those employees had to be laid off? None of them could be retrained? Why is it that so many companies seems to regularly make the *same* mistake of over-hiring and then "needing" to downsize? And if Ebay did a layoff last year why not lay off these people a year ago? Did they miscalculate last year? Was this layoff planned more than a year out? What changed in a year that makes Ebays calculations more accurate now?
    - andsoitis 3y ago
      > Why is it that so many companies seems to regularly make the same mistake of over-hiring and then "needing" to downsize? Perhaps the issue is with the assumption that it is a mistake. Or rather, that it is the kind of mistake that is readily foreseeable or a mistake where incentives didn’t force you “over hire”. When there’s rapid growth the be had, why would you not staff up lest you lose share.

ChrisArchitect 3y ago

[dupe] More: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39111911 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39111911