4 ms·

Incredible that people like you will watch the industry lay off hundreds of thousands of workers then turn around and make this argument. It's like devs are all

by __loam 2y ago

Incredible that people like you will watch the industry lay off hundreds of thousands of workers then turn around and make this argument. It's like devs are allergic to any semblance of labor solidarity.

nosefurhairdo 2y ago
Would you rather have layoffs at your company or have your company go out of business due to excessive labor costs? Should poor performers be immune from layoffs? When is a layoff justifiable? I'm free to leave my job at any time, so why shouldn't my employer be free to leave me?
- __loam 2y ago
  Should the most profitable companies on the planet be free to lay off good performers in a country where healthcare is tied to employment? You can invent strawmen like poor performers and failing companies all day long but the facts differ quite a lot from your perception.
  - gnarlynarwhal42 2y ago
    What motivation would a company have to lay off a good performer? Seems counter-productive, but I'm not a CEO
- brian-armstrong 2y ago
  > Would you rather have layoffs at your company or have your company go out of business due to excessive labor costs? I invite you to read earnings reports from any of the FAANG companies in the last 5 years. Go ahead, I'll wait.
  - daedrdev 2y ago
    Most people actually don't work at immensely profitable FAANG companies.
    - __loam 2y ago
      And yet they're so massive that them all doing layoffs at the same time despite that profitability has a huge impact on the labor market of the while industry.
      - daedrdev 2y ago
        If someone produces less effort than they cost, it's reasonable to fire them even if the organization as a whole is profitable. That's probably not what the FAANG companies did, but layoffs are not unjustifiable for profitable companies.
        __loam 2y ago
        We're not talking about performance terminations here.
- ornornor 2y ago
  Your employer doesn’t need you to buy food or pay for a roof over their head. You need your employer to stay fed and housed. There is a lot more downside for you than your employer, thus a massive power asymmetry. The only way to restore the balance is solidarity between workers and it’s usually a union (or a guild)
  - WJW 2y ago
    Get some financial discipline and arrange an emergency fund covering at least 6 months of expenses. It's amazing how much less leverage your employer is able to exert if you can make good on a threat of leaving.
    - ornornor 2y ago
      Or you could have leverage from a union and not have to seriously consider quitting every time you need something from your employer.
    - goodpoint 2y ago
      > It's amazing how much less leverage your employer is able to exert if you can make good on a threat of leaving. Look how well it worked for the mass layoffs.
  - nosefurhairdo 2y ago
    I don't need my employer for that either, because they're competing for my labor in a market with many other employers. It would be extremely costly to replace me because of the critical role I have on a highly profitable product. If anything, I'm the one with leverage, which I use every year to request more pay, fancier titles, and larger responsibilities. Realistically, if I were laid off today I'd likely land a better paying job than this one. I choose to stay because I like my boss, my work, and my coworkers. If circumstances changed such that it made sense to lay me off then I should be laid off. Why should anyone be obligated to pay my salary if I'm not offering commensurate value?
    - ornornor 2y ago
lurking_swe 2y ago
i sympathize but this is a myopic view. zoom out 5, 10, 20 years. It’s pretty clear the parent is correct. Historically anyway. But what’s happening post covid is a mess and we’ll see how the future looks for us in tech.
_fat_santa 2y ago
> It's like devs are allergic to any semblance of labor solidarity. No, it's because we know how good we have it. Yes tech layoffs can be brutal but we all signed up for that. I knew even back in college that tech jobs can be flaky and I was likely to be out on my ass a few times in career. But I took the deal anyways because I can make six figures wearing pajamas in my basement.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
Aeolun 2y ago
> It's like devs are allergic to any semblance of labor solidarity. I think that comes from seeing our field filled with people only in it for the money, doing the bare minimum that’ll keep them employed.
- sensanaty 2y ago
  Why does that bother you though? I couldn't care less about how others work as long as they're not actively detrimental to everyone else. Hell, the managerial and C-suites are the ones that impact people the most negatively most of the time, yet we're complaining about someone who's got actual bills to pay for doing their job and not killing themselves over it. The bare minimum is what everyone should be doing, because nobody owes their employers more than that
  - Aeolun 2y ago
    > Why does that bother you though? It leads to scrum culture, because you need accountability for the people that aren’t self-motivated enough to proceed with work without extrinsic motivation (their ideal situation is nothing to do but still get paid). That’s my theory anyway. Previously the assumption seems to have been that the nerd was gonna nerd, and the only thing you sometimes needed to do was reign them in.
goodpoint 2y ago
> It's like devs are allergic to any semblance of labor solidarity. It's not just devs, but the crowd in here.

by __loam 2y ago

nosefurhairdo 2y ago

Would you rather have layoffs at your company or have your company go out of business due to excessive labor costs? Should poor performers be immune from layoffs? When is a layoff justifiable? I'm free to leave my job at any time, so why shouldn't my employer be free to leave me?

__loam 2y ago
Should the most profitable companies on the planet be free to lay off good performers in a country where healthcare is tied to employment? You can invent strawmen like poor performers and failing companies all day long but the facts differ quite a lot from your perception.
- gnarlynarwhal42 2y ago
  What motivation would a company have to lay off a good performer? Seems counter-productive, but I'm not a CEO
brian-armstrong 2y ago
> Would you rather have layoffs at your company or have your company go out of business due to excessive labor costs? I invite you to read earnings reports from any of the FAANG companies in the last 5 years. Go ahead, I'll wait.
- daedrdev 2y ago
  Most people actually don't work at immensely profitable FAANG companies.
  - __loam 2y ago
    And yet they're so massive that them all doing layoffs at the same time despite that profitability has a huge impact on the labor market of the while industry.
    - daedrdev 2y ago
      If someone produces less effort than they cost, it's reasonable to fire them even if the organization as a whole is profitable. That's probably not what the FAANG companies did, but layoffs are not unjustifiable for profitable companies.
      - __loam 2y ago
        We're not talking about performance terminations here.
ornornor 2y ago
Your employer doesn’t need you to buy food or pay for a roof over their head. You need your employer to stay fed and housed. There is a lot more downside for you than your employer, thus a massive power asymmetry. The only way to restore the balance is solidarity between workers and it’s usually a union (or a guild)
- WJW 2y ago
  Get some financial discipline and arrange an emergency fund covering at least 6 months of expenses. It's amazing how much less leverage your employer is able to exert if you can make good on a threat of leaving.
  - ornornor 2y ago
    Or you could have leverage from a union and not have to seriously consider quitting every time you need something from your employer.
  - goodpoint 2y ago
    > It's amazing how much less leverage your employer is able to exert if you can make good on a threat of leaving. Look how well it worked for the mass layoffs.
- nosefurhairdo 2y ago
  I don't need my employer for that either, because they're competing for my labor in a market with many other employers. It would be extremely costly to replace me because of the critical role I have on a highly profitable product. If anything, I'm the one with leverage, which I use every year to request more pay, fancier titles, and larger responsibilities. Realistically, if I were laid off today I'd likely land a better paying job than this one. I choose to stay because I like my boss, my work, and my coworkers. If circumstances changed such that it made sense to lay me off then I should be laid off. Why should anyone be obligated to pay my salary if I'm not offering commensurate value?
  - ornornor 2y ago

lurking_swe 2y ago

i sympathize but this is a myopic view. zoom out 5, 10, 20 years. It’s pretty clear the parent is correct. Historically anyway. But what’s happening post covid is a mess and we’ll see how the future looks for us in tech.

_fat_santa 2y ago

> It's like devs are allergic to any semblance of labor solidarity. No, it's because we know how good we have it. Yes tech layoffs can be brutal but we all signed up for that. I knew even back in college that tech jobs can be flaky and I was likely to be out on my ass a few times in career. But I took the deal anyways because I can make six figures wearing pajamas in my basement.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

Aeolun 2y ago

> It's like devs are allergic to any semblance of labor solidarity. I think that comes from seeing our field filled with people only in it for the money, doing the bare minimum that’ll keep them employed.

sensanaty 2y ago
Why does that bother you though? I couldn't care less about how others work as long as they're not actively detrimental to everyone else. Hell, the managerial and C-suites are the ones that impact people the most negatively most of the time, yet we're complaining about someone who's got actual bills to pay for doing their job and not killing themselves over it. The bare minimum is what everyone should be doing, because nobody owes their employers more than that
- Aeolun 2y ago
  > Why does that bother you though? It leads to scrum culture, because you need accountability for the people that aren’t self-motivated enough to proceed with work without extrinsic motivation (their ideal situation is nothing to do but still get paid). That’s my theory anyway. Previously the assumption seems to have been that the nerd was gonna nerd, and the only thing you sometimes needed to do was reign them in.

goodpoint 2y ago

> It's like devs are allergic to any semblance of labor solidarity. It's not just devs, but the crowd in here.