3 ms·
In Europe where most countries are notoriously hard to fire people they don't do layoffs like that "just to be safe", they instead just cut-back on hiring more
by DanielHB 2y ago
In Europe where most countries are notoriously hard to fire people they don't do layoffs like that "just to be safe", they instead just cut-back on hiring more people during though times.
It has an impact of morale, but not nearly as bad I imagine. I wonder if that is one of the reasons why Europe companies tend to be smaller companies, while US tend to be bigger. Expansion is easier when you can fire at any time, smaller companies are more likely to succeed if they don't over-hire and keep talent around.
- luckylion 2y agoI don't know whether it's a reason for size ("one market" isn't just about taxes, it's also about culture and language, and that's more different in the EU than the US), but it definitely makes companies more risk-averse towards expansion and disadvantages people with non-average backgrounds. The risk your CV suggests (e.g. mental health, unemployment, non-traditional career) gets multiplied if it's close to impossible to fire you.
- DanielHB 2y agoPersonally I think the model in Brazil is the best one, you can be fired at any time but you always get severance with the value of the severance dictated by how long you been at the company (I think it was 1 month of salary per year of tenure). It does create some problems but not nearly as bad.
- physicsguy 2y agoYes, this is happening at the company I work for. Total hiring freeze, people leaving through retirement or attrition aren't necessarily replaced. Salary raises are lower than inflation. Because no growth in staff, there's limited progression opportunity - you can't take a step up by moving to a new team since the business isn't expanding. It does have an impact in that ambitious people get frustrated and end up leaving.