It really makes no sense. Unless the employee is negatively productive why take a risk and the fixed cost of onboarding a new employee if the current one is mar

It really makes no sense. Unless the employee is negatively productive why take a risk and the fixed cost of onboarding a new employee if the current one is marginally profitable or productive? It might a few months for a new engineer to get truly productive. And then all the existing engineers have to take time out of their day to do interviews. And then those same engineers spend time and energy onboarding the new hire. That’s all costs and lost productivity. All opportunity costs associated with hiring. And yet the company had — ostensibly — many employees of varying levels of productivity … it doesn’t seem to make sense that firing 10% or 50% meant that each of those was not justifying their salaries … especially if the next round of hires are juniors or even onshore’d seniors they still will need months of training on the current stack.