3 ms·

> Rightfully so. Name me the big tech company who wouldn't fire such an employee instantly. Just because something is done by most companies doesn't make it ok

> Rightfully so. Name me the big tech company who wouldn't fire such an employee instantly. Just because something is done by most companies doesn't make it okay. Are mass layoffs "rightful" in any sense of that word?

swman 3y ago
Cringe. Mass layoffs are part of the Faustian bargain you accept when you sign the offer letter to work at the behemoths of capitalism. These are the biggest like top 10 companies in the whole world. It’s just business. But then again even those making 400k plus TC make appeals to emotion instead of rational thinking. There are plenty of jobs for these people where they can make 200k TC and not risk getting fired, which is still a good salary. If you want more and more, you must play with the devil. It’s really not that complicated.
ghaff 3y ago
If the alternative is the company going out of business? Yes? People can rightly protest the way layoffs are conducted but the idea that a company is "wrongful" to have a layoff sometimes is silly.
- user_7832 3y ago
  I'm not specifically saying layoffs are good or bad, I was giving an example of how something being common (layoffs) doesn't automatically make it good (it's of course not good for the fired people).
  - ghaff 3y ago
    Of course, certainly not for many of the fired people (although depending on severance and situations--once I would have been happy to have been laid off). And layoff, and the way they're conducted, can certainly be conducted poorly and with less empathy than is called for. (Though, in reality empathy mostly=money in this context.)
wilg 3y ago
It's not immoral to fire multiple people from a company.
- user_7832 3y ago
  My argument is that it's not automatically right either to fire people, just because it is a common practice. Maybe I should've used another example like lobbying or politicians' insider trading as a practice that's common but not necessarily right.
  - wilg 3y ago
    Sure, common practice doesn’t mean it’s automatically right but it is an indication that it’s generally accepted for reasons that may be valid. So it’s reasonable evidence to cite, and is a method of explaining that your argument now has to account for the general case.
    - user_7832 3y ago
      I partially/mostly agree, I think it's more of "it's good enough because it's either good or it's close enough to not bother speaking/complaining/doing anything about it". Eg targeted ads are accepted, but banning them takes massive effort and "people can use ublock anyway". But yeah that's splitting hairs.
duxup 3y ago
>Are mass layoffs "rightful" in any sense of that word? I don't see those as inherently right or wrong.
- user_7832 3y ago
  Sure, I'm not in favor of them but neither do I consider them right or wrong for all parties. But the parent comment seemed to imply that firing him was justified, because any company would do the same. I disagree with the part about it being justifiable just because it is a common practice.

swman 3y ago

Cringe. Mass layoffs are part of the Faustian bargain you accept when you sign the offer letter to work at the behemoths of capitalism. These are the biggest like top 10 companies in the whole world. It’s just business. But then again even those making 400k plus TC make appeals to emotion instead of rational thinking. There are plenty of jobs for these people where they can make 200k TC and not risk getting fired, which is still a good salary. If you want more and more, you must play with the devil. It’s really not that complicated.

ghaff 3y ago

If the alternative is the company going out of business? Yes? People can rightly protest the way layoffs are conducted but the idea that a company is "wrongful" to have a layoff sometimes is silly.

user_7832 3y ago
I'm not specifically saying layoffs are good or bad, I was giving an example of how something being common (layoffs) doesn't automatically make it good (it's of course not good for the fired people).
- ghaff 3y ago
  Of course, certainly not for many of the fired people (although depending on severance and situations--once I would have been happy to have been laid off). And layoff, and the way they're conducted, can certainly be conducted poorly and with less empathy than is called for. (Though, in reality empathy mostly=money in this context.)

wilg 3y ago

It's not immoral to fire multiple people from a company.

user_7832 3y ago
My argument is that it's not automatically right either to fire people, just because it is a common practice. Maybe I should've used another example like lobbying or politicians' insider trading as a practice that's common but not necessarily right.
- wilg 3y ago
  Sure, common practice doesn’t mean it’s automatically right but it is an indication that it’s generally accepted for reasons that may be valid. So it’s reasonable evidence to cite, and is a method of explaining that your argument now has to account for the general case.
  - user_7832 3y ago
    I partially/mostly agree, I think it's more of "it's good enough because it's either good or it's close enough to not bother speaking/complaining/doing anything about it". Eg targeted ads are accepted, but banning them takes massive effort and "people can use ublock anyway". But yeah that's splitting hairs.

duxup 3y ago

>Are mass layoffs "rightful" in any sense of that word? I don't see those as inherently right or wrong.

user_7832 3y ago
Sure, I'm not in favor of them but neither do I consider them right or wrong for all parties. But the parent comment seemed to imply that firing him was justified, because any company would do the same. I disagree with the part about it being justifiable just because it is a common practice.