4 ms·

Have mass layoffs ever wound up working out well for a tech company? I was at Google from 2013 -> 2015 as an FTE. My impression was that there was a mix of de

Have mass layoffs ever wound up working out well for a tech company? I was at Google from 2013 -> 2015 as an FTE. My impression was that there was a mix of dead wood and high performers. I knew people that basically did nothing but come in late, find the best cafe for lunch, and leave early. While others worked 12 hour days. But the problem with laying off the deadwood, rather than firing them for cause, is that it causes the high performers to look at other opportunities and leave.

xnx 2y ago
> But the problem with laying off the deadwood, rather than firing them for cause, is that it causes the high performers to look at other opportunities and leave. Can you explain the difference? Is being "deadwood" not cause for firing? I'm probably an average performer, but I find working with "deadwood" extremely demoralizing.
- drewg123 2y ago
  A layoff generally means "business is slow, so we don't need you anymore" (its not you, its us), where firing for cause generally means "you're not performing up to minimum standards" (its not us, its you). In most places in the US, a layoff comes with state unemployment benefits, where as being fired does not. Most importantly, a layoff leaves other people with the feeling "that could have happened to me, I'd better start looking for new opportunities", where as a firing for cause generally allows one to think "that person was such a slacker, how did it take so long"...
  - pseudalopex 2y ago
    > A layoff generally means "business is slow, so we don't need you anymore" (its not you, its us), where firing for cause generally means "you're not performing up to minimum standards" (its not us, its you). In most places in the US, a layoff comes with state unemployment benefits, where as being fired does not. Workers terminated for performance can collect unemployment benefits usually. The terms and meanings differ state to state and person to person.

xnx 2y ago

> But the problem with laying off the deadwood, rather than firing them for cause, is that it causes the high performers to look at other opportunities and leave. Can you explain the difference? Is being "deadwood" not cause for firing? I'm probably an average performer, but I find working with "deadwood" extremely demoralizing.

drewg123 2y ago
A layoff generally means "business is slow, so we don't need you anymore" (its not you, its us), where firing for cause generally means "you're not performing up to minimum standards" (its not us, its you). In most places in the US, a layoff comes with state unemployment benefits, where as being fired does not. Most importantly, a layoff leaves other people with the feeling "that could have happened to me, I'd better start looking for new opportunities", where as a firing for cause generally allows one to think "that person was such a slacker, how did it take so long"...
- pseudalopex 2y ago
  > A layoff generally means "business is slow, so we don't need you anymore" (its not you, its us), where firing for cause generally means "you're not performing up to minimum standards" (its not us, its you). In most places in the US, a layoff comes with state unemployment benefits, where as being fired does not. Workers terminated for performance can collect unemployment benefits usually. The terms and meanings differ state to state and person to person.