4 ms·

It is indeed pretty impossible to fire people who don't want to be fired. It's still possible to spin up a subsidiary and hire people into it and if doesn't wor

It is indeed pretty impossible to fire people who don't want to be fired. It's still possible to spin up a subsidiary and hire people into it and if doesn't work out, well, it didn't work out. Is it even the most commons reason why companies do layoffs? Sounds like a propaganda piece to suppress both wages and rights here.

onraglanroad 1y ago
> It is indeed pretty impossible to fire people It isn't really. In fact, it's usually very easy: you just have to follow the exact procedure that is written down for you. Every example I've seen when people have claimed differently, they haven't followed that procedure. Literally every time.
- naldb 1y ago
  It’s very easy: spend an insane amount of money, usually at a time when your business can’t afford it.
  - surgical_fire 1y ago
    That's not how it works. You just can't fire at will. If your business can't afford to fire people it probably shouldn't be hiring too.
    - naldb 1y ago
      How do you know at the time of hiring that months or years down the road the business won’t go well?
      - piva00 1y ago
        Isn't that part of the job of being in top management? Being paid millions of bucks for your skills that should tell what your business need? If the signs are showing that you might need to fire people, you need to think and work for that: set enough money aside to pay for severance and/or buy-outs, not just decide "oh shit, I can't pay them, and I can't pay what is needed for me to fire them", that's just incompetence. The way you present this is like business leaders are victims that were helpless on forecasting what their businesses need, which is exactly their fucking job to do.
      - Muromec 1y ago
        Your problem, not mine, lol.
        naldb 1y ago
        Actually it’s everybody’s problem, since job inflexibility is one of the reasons why Europe is so poor compared to other first world countries. Who exactly benefits from a business going under? Its bigger competitors? The less well off are the ones that suffer the most from oligarchic sectors and cartels.
        surgical_fire 1y ago
        > Actually it’s everybody’s problem, since job inflexibility is one of the reasons why Europe is so poor compared to other first world countries. Except it is not. I chose to live in the EU when I had the option to move to the US, and it is fine. Unless your measurement of "being poor" is that you can't exploit people in a get rich quick scheme and make destructive amounts of money but being acquired or dumping your IPO in the stock market.
        naldb 1y ago
        We are talking here about businesses with say 10 employees that go through dire straits and can’t fire people to survive. The only solution is to close down and lay EVERYONE off. IPO? Get rich quick scheme? Why is hyperbole the only response to this actual issue?
        surgical_fire 1y ago
        Again, of the business with only 10 employees cannot survive, it was due to the incompetence of those managing it. Part of a healthy economy is allowing businesses to fail, so that others can take its place. If demand for those services exist, other businesses will take it. If the demand is not there, the business should not exist. How your reply is related to the previous point of "Europe being poor" is for anyone to guess.
        1y ago
      - surgical_fire 1y ago
        If you are a business owner, the business doing well is your fucking job. If you can't do your job you should fail. What you want is the freedom to be shitty at running your company, and offload your incompetence by exploiting the workers under you.
        naldb 1y ago
        It’s not “you” failing. If your business fails, everybody gets fired. Why is everybody getting fired better than firing a few people?
        surgical_fire 1y ago
        If the business fails, the owners will have to use their assets to adequately compensate the employees according to what they are owed, and the employees are free to find another job. Let's not mince words here - if the business fails it was because of the incompetence of those managing it, and it would fail whether or not it was treating employees unfairly. I won't accept this as an excuse to erode labor rights. Moreover, what weak-ass crybaby rhetoric is that now? I always hear that business owners should earn more because they take risks. Failing is a very real possibility when you take risks. If you don't want to take risks just don't start a business.
nosianu 1y ago
The German magazine "Spiegel" has a (paywalled) career-info article on the homepage right now about a lawyer specializing in getting rid of unwanted employees. https://www.spiegel.de/karriere/entlassungen-wie-unternehmen-fast-jeden-rausbekommen-und-wie-beschaeftigte-ihren-job-sichern-a-7b021eb1-4f97-4c59-b738-82cd2df35a37 https://www.spiegel.de/karriere/entlassungen-wie-unternehmen... The headline text translated: > “I'm currently trying to get a severely disabled works council member out. We're well on our way.” > Removing high earners from the payroll, compensating employees who cannot be dismissed: employer lawyers like Alexander Birkhahn are booming. Here, he reveals how companies can get almost anyone out—and how employees can secure their jobs.

onraglanroad 1y ago

> It is indeed pretty impossible to fire people It isn't really. In fact, it's usually very easy: you just have to follow the exact procedure that is written down for you. Every example I've seen when people have claimed differently, they haven't followed that procedure. Literally every time.

naldb 1y ago
It’s very easy: spend an insane amount of money, usually at a time when your business can’t afford it.
- surgical_fire 1y ago
  That's not how it works. You just can't fire at will. If your business can't afford to fire people it probably shouldn't be hiring too.
  - naldb 1y ago
    How do you know at the time of hiring that months or years down the road the business won’t go well?
    - piva00 1y ago
      Isn't that part of the job of being in top management? Being paid millions of bucks for your skills that should tell what your business need? If the signs are showing that you might need to fire people, you need to think and work for that: set enough money aside to pay for severance and/or buy-outs, not just decide "oh shit, I can't pay them, and I can't pay what is needed for me to fire them", that's just incompetence. The way you present this is like business leaders are victims that were helpless on forecasting what their businesses need, which is exactly their fucking job to do.
    - Muromec 1y ago
      Your problem, not mine, lol.
      - naldb 1y ago
        Actually it’s everybody’s problem, since job inflexibility is one of the reasons why Europe is so poor compared to other first world countries. Who exactly benefits from a business going under? Its bigger competitors? The less well off are the ones that suffer the most from oligarchic sectors and cartels.
        surgical_fire 1y ago
        > Actually it’s everybody’s problem, since job inflexibility is one of the reasons why Europe is so poor compared to other first world countries. Except it is not. I chose to live in the EU when I had the option to move to the US, and it is fine. Unless your measurement of "being poor" is that you can't exploit people in a get rich quick scheme and make destructive amounts of money but being acquired or dumping your IPO in the stock market.
        naldb 1y ago
        We are talking here about businesses with say 10 employees that go through dire straits and can’t fire people to survive. The only solution is to close down and lay EVERYONE off. IPO? Get rich quick scheme? Why is hyperbole the only response to this actual issue?
        surgical_fire 1y ago
        Again, of the business with only 10 employees cannot survive, it was due to the incompetence of those managing it. Part of a healthy economy is allowing businesses to fail, so that others can take its place. If demand for those services exist, other businesses will take it. If the demand is not there, the business should not exist. How your reply is related to the previous point of "Europe being poor" is for anyone to guess.
        1y ago
    - surgical_fire 1y ago
      If you are a business owner, the business doing well is your fucking job. If you can't do your job you should fail. What you want is the freedom to be shitty at running your company, and offload your incompetence by exploiting the workers under you.
      - naldb 1y ago
        It’s not “you” failing. If your business fails, everybody gets fired. Why is everybody getting fired better than firing a few people?
        surgical_fire 1y ago
        If the business fails, the owners will have to use their assets to adequately compensate the employees according to what they are owed, and the employees are free to find another job. Let's not mince words here - if the business fails it was because of the incompetence of those managing it, and it would fail whether or not it was treating employees unfairly. I won't accept this as an excuse to erode labor rights. Moreover, what weak-ass crybaby rhetoric is that now? I always hear that business owners should earn more because they take risks. Failing is a very real possibility when you take risks. If you don't want to take risks just don't start a business.

nosianu 1y ago

The German magazine "Spiegel" has a (paywalled) career-info article on the homepage right now about a lawyer specializing in getting rid of unwanted employees. https://www.spiegel.de/karriere/entlassungen-wie-unternehmen-fast-jeden-rausbekommen-und-wie-beschaeftigte-ihren-job-sichern-a-7b021eb1-4f97-4c59-b738-82cd2df35a37 https://www.spiegel.de/karriere/entlassungen-wie-unternehmen... The headline text translated: > “I'm currently trying to get a severely disabled works council member out. We're well on our way.” > Removing high earners from the payroll, compensating employees who cannot be dismissed: employer lawyers like Alexander Birkhahn are booming. Here, he reveals how companies can get almost anyone out—and how employees can secure their jobs.