4 ms·

why are tech workers, my industry, so committed to this ideology? Do you think the tech layoffs of the last few years was a justified culling of lazy idiots?

asdasdsddd 2y ago
yes mostly, i worked with many lazy idiots, who undeservedly made millions while our clients and customers suffered
- anon84873628 2y ago
  That's not how it went for us. I would have chosen a very different set of people to sack. Unfortunately I think those types of layoffs are separate from "firing" and probably not covered by these terms.
- code_for_monkey 2y ago
  what do you think their opinions of you were?
  - asdasdsddd 2y ago
    a junior who was dumb enough to actually do work
repeekad 2y ago
I think almost by definition a layoff is to remove redundant/bottom performers to keep the machine clean and lean, that’s capitalism for ya
- mmooss 2y ago
  The reason given is usually to cut costs, because the company claims to lack the cashflow or income to pay them. If the company can't afford it or doesn't believe they need it, they cut meat and bone and not just fat. Look at the news organizations laying off reporters in large numbers. The news organizations' product suffers considerably.
abletonlive 2y ago
Honestly yes. I've been interviewing people that have gotten laid off and almost 75% of the time I'm thinking that they were probably chosen for layoffs due to low performance
- kergonath 2y ago
  > I've been interviewing people that have gotten laid off and almost 75% of the time I'm thinking that they were probably chosen for layoffs due to low performance The people interviewing with you might be a biased subset of those that were laid off. I don’t mean anything about your company, which could be great or terrible, I have no idea. But I would expect the best performers to get new positions quickly through their networks and connections. You would not see these people replying to random offers, but it does not mean that they were not high-performers who were laid off.
  - abletonlive 2y ago
    > The people interviewing with you might be a biased subset of those that were laid off. I suspect this to be very likely the case but I don't think it changes anything here. If we laid off people that were high performers and they got taken up in the job market quickly that means things are still healthy and we are still giving jobs to people that deserve jobs. A net neutral effect on the system as a whole. The stragglers that can't find new jobs because they were laid off for low performance AND also are low performing interviewers are not useful to the system. Now they just kind of eat up some interviewing productivity but thats probably a net-positive for the entire job market as a whole.
lc9er 2y ago
I'm old enough to remember a time when people in tech were called 'wizards' and there was an air of mystery that surrounded the industry. A large subset of this group really seems to have bought into the idea that working in tech makes you 'special'. It does not. It's a skilled profession that is trainable and attainable by large swaths of the population. Working in tech does not make you special (Yes - you) and the tech industry is well overdue for quality of life improvements that other, organized, sectors have had for decades.
- WalterBright 2y ago
  Back in 1978, when I worked as an electronics assembly technician, the company (Aph) decided to take us to a local electronics convention in Los Angeles. We showed up and got in line to get our steenkin' badges. I was in front, and was asked what my job title was. As I was soldering boards together, I said "gnome". The clerk laughed, and said "no, seriously". I said "seriously, gnome". We argued a bit, and he capitulated, saying I was going to be sorry. The Aph guy behind me heard the debate, and asked for "wizard" as his job title. And so forth for all the employees. I think the owner of Aph asked for "grand wizard" or something like that. Wandering around the convention floor, people would read our badges and laugh. It was all great fun. After that, such job titles appeared on business cards, convention badges, etc. I flatter myself in suspecting that it was I who started it!
  - coldcode 2y ago
    When I was at Apple (before Steve returned, when it was going out of business), the employees got to pick their titles. Most were approved, but one woman wanted to be "Madonna of the File System", I think that was not. She did, however, know that code inside and out and deserved to get it.
    - WalterBright 2y ago
      I suppose picking "CEO" would be rejected as well? :-) I was once interviewed for a job by the CEO. He asked me where I saw myself in 5 years. I said "CEO". I got a "no hire".

asdasdsddd 2y ago

yes mostly, i worked with many lazy idiots, who undeservedly made millions while our clients and customers suffered

anon84873628 2y ago
That's not how it went for us. I would have chosen a very different set of people to sack. Unfortunately I think those types of layoffs are separate from "firing" and probably not covered by these terms.
code_for_monkey 2y ago
what do you think their opinions of you were?
- asdasdsddd 2y ago
  a junior who was dumb enough to actually do work

repeekad 2y ago

I think almost by definition a layoff is to remove redundant/bottom performers to keep the machine clean and lean, that’s capitalism for ya

mmooss 2y ago
The reason given is usually to cut costs, because the company claims to lack the cashflow or income to pay them. If the company can't afford it or doesn't believe they need it, they cut meat and bone and not just fat. Look at the news organizations laying off reporters in large numbers. The news organizations' product suffers considerably.

abletonlive 2y ago

Honestly yes. I've been interviewing people that have gotten laid off and almost 75% of the time I'm thinking that they were probably chosen for layoffs due to low performance

kergonath 2y ago
> I've been interviewing people that have gotten laid off and almost 75% of the time I'm thinking that they were probably chosen for layoffs due to low performance The people interviewing with you might be a biased subset of those that were laid off. I don’t mean anything about your company, which could be great or terrible, I have no idea. But I would expect the best performers to get new positions quickly through their networks and connections. You would not see these people replying to random offers, but it does not mean that they were not high-performers who were laid off.
- abletonlive 2y ago
  > The people interviewing with you might be a biased subset of those that were laid off. I suspect this to be very likely the case but I don't think it changes anything here. If we laid off people that were high performers and they got taken up in the job market quickly that means things are still healthy and we are still giving jobs to people that deserve jobs. A net neutral effect on the system as a whole. The stragglers that can't find new jobs because they were laid off for low performance AND also are low performing interviewers are not useful to the system. Now they just kind of eat up some interviewing productivity but thats probably a net-positive for the entire job market as a whole.

lc9er 2y ago

I'm old enough to remember a time when people in tech were called 'wizards' and there was an air of mystery that surrounded the industry. A large subset of this group really seems to have bought into the idea that working in tech makes you 'special'. It does not. It's a skilled profession that is trainable and attainable by large swaths of the population. Working in tech does not make you special (Yes - you) and the tech industry is well overdue for quality of life improvements that other, organized, sectors have had for decades.

WalterBright 2y ago
Back in 1978, when I worked as an electronics assembly technician, the company (Aph) decided to take us to a local electronics convention in Los Angeles. We showed up and got in line to get our steenkin' badges. I was in front, and was asked what my job title was. As I was soldering boards together, I said "gnome". The clerk laughed, and said "no, seriously". I said "seriously, gnome". We argued a bit, and he capitulated, saying I was going to be sorry. The Aph guy behind me heard the debate, and asked for "wizard" as his job title. And so forth for all the employees. I think the owner of Aph asked for "grand wizard" or something like that. Wandering around the convention floor, people would read our badges and laugh. It was all great fun. After that, such job titles appeared on business cards, convention badges, etc. I flatter myself in suspecting that it was I who started it!
- coldcode 2y ago
  When I was at Apple (before Steve returned, when it was going out of business), the employees got to pick their titles. Most were approved, but one woman wanted to be "Madonna of the File System", I think that was not. She did, however, know that code inside and out and deserved to get it.
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    I suppose picking "CEO" would be rejected as well? :-) I was once interviewed for a job by the CEO. He asked me where I saw myself in 5 years. I said "CEO". I got a "no hire".