4 ms·

>we're not making this decision because we're in trouble. our business is strong. gross profit continues to grow, we continue to serve more and more customers,

>we're not making this decision because we're in trouble. our business is strong. gross profit continues to grow, we continue to serve more and more customers, and profitability is improving. In my country, this action would be literally illegal. Even in countries where it isn’t, it feels highly immoral. “I’m not in any kind of pressure to do this but I’m choosing to shed the people who created my wealth for greater personal gain”.

iddan 8mo ago
This is America. Like it or not.
nailer 8mo ago
What government makes it illegal for management to manage their company?
- torben-friis 8mo ago
  Many European countries, including mine (spain) only accept mass firings when the company proves it’s a necessity. Usually this means showing losses or the effect of force majeure events like natural disasters. You can manage your company just fine, by not overshooting your hiring by 2x if workers were anctually unneeded for example.
  - acchow 8mo ago
    But in your country (Spain), Telefónica de España laid off 3649 workers in Dec 2023 (about 40% of that unit) despite growing net income by 17% that year.
    - torben-friis 8mo ago
      Nice googling, but that’s just an example that proves my point. They had to go through a process extensively justifying losses (mostly that certain jobs were no longer relevant as they were pre-digital workforce), negotiate with unions and offer voluntary leaving conditions. The resulting offer was good enough that more workers applied to be fired than were necesssary. For context, the deal was basically to pay them 70% of their current salary from the dismissal moment until their retirement at 63.
      - Klonoar 8mo ago
        What was the average age of the worker that took that deal?
  - 121789 8mo ago
    spain has the highest unemployment rate in the EU. maybe you are ignoring important tradeoffs and are a little too confident about your own opinion on what it means to "manage your company just fine"
    - torben-friis 8mo ago
      Maybe, or maybe you’re about to find out what happens to the consumer side when a large percentage of companies decide they no longer need half their workforce judging on linkedin vibes.
    - askonomm 8mo ago
      Nope, that's Finland now. Spain is nr 2.
      - listeria 8mo ago
        But the definition of economically active differs between the two: Finland includes people from ages 15-89, while in Spain you need to be 16 or older. And judging from what I read the rise in unemployment in Finland is attributed to more people entering the workforce.
acchow 8mo ago
Can you point to the laws in your country that would make this illegal? I’m skeptical
- input_sh 8mo ago
  I can, easily. Speaking for my country and assuming you are not on a fixed-term contract, you can only get fired for one of the three reasons: 1. Company's in financial trouble and forced to downsize. 2. The position becomes obsolete and there's no option to transition you into some other role. In this case, the company can't hire anyone with a similar-enough skillset to yours for at least a year (or maybe even longer, I'm not sure). 3. Gross incompetence, in which case you need to be given an opportunity to course correct via a few documented warnings before being fired. Every warning requires your signature so that the company can't just make them up and backdate them. That said, you don't become a permanent employee on day one, a company can issue up to three fixed-term contract before being forced to give you a permanent one. If you're on a fixed-term contract, they can just not extend it without having to satisfy any of the criteria above. But after a maximum of 3 years at the same company (as the maximum length for a fixed-term contract is one year), the criteria for firing you increases drastically. So, the only way this could happen in my country is if the company stops renewing fixed-term contracts for recent employees, but then it wouldn't all be at the same time and you'd get the hint before the time comes to plan accordingly.
  - drstewart 8mo ago
    >Speaking for my country I like how none of you ever reveal this mysterious country you're from, probably so you don't get called on the claims you're making. Anyway, in my country unemployment is 0% and everyone is rich and there are no problems. Why can't your country achieve the same?
    - timvdalen 8mo ago
      As an example, the comment you're replying to is true for The Netherlands
boxingdog 8mo ago
[dead]
atleastoptimal 8mo ago
This is part of the reason why American tech companies are so successful though. Being unable to lay off workers causes stagnation at companies where fast-development is paramount.
- wiseowise 8mo ago
  > This is part of the reason why American tech companies are so successful though. Nothing to do with biggest economy in the world for sure.
  - atleastoptimal 8mo ago
    That helps, but there's a reason why the collective economy of the EU has produced only like 1/10 the number of unicorns over the past 30 years despite their GDP being around 2/3 the US's
    - orphea 8mo ago
      Almost like producing unicorns is not the single most important thing in the world.
      - atleastoptimal 8mo ago
        Well with respect to economic dynamism it ranks pretty highly.
groundzeros2015 8mo ago
Your country also pays less and has fewer jobs. Increasing the cost to fire, increases the cost to hire.
- torben-friis 8mo ago
  And yet we live longer and with higher quality of life, by most standards (chronic and mental illnesses, life expectancy, etc). No need to turn it into a dick measuring context, we have plenty of flaws of our own. Just pointing out that legal or not, under most morals systems, loudly proclaiming that you’re willing to screw your people for no clear necessity will get you socially ostracized.
  - groundzeros2015 8mo ago
    > No need to turn it into a dick measuring context Yes, which is why it’s not helpful to bring up a completely different economic system with an unfamiliar culture. Why are you saying this in the next sentence: > yet we live longer and with higher quality of life
    - torben-friis 8mo ago
      >If the business is not able to be profitable everyone is screwed. Sure, we agree there. It’s not like needing profitability is a weird quirk of the American system. I am not criticizing the layoffs, but the layoffs while mentioning business is booming and they have no reasons forcing their hand. I’m curious about your point of view, would you applaud and support your employer taking this attitude? Firing half the workers while agreeing that there is no pressure to let anyone go looks good to you?
      - groundzeros2015 8mo ago
        > would you applaud and support your employer taking this attitude? I don’t see my employer as an owner or steward of me. I think we are in business relationship where both sides win. If circumstances change I understand I may need to find a new job.
pembrook 8mo ago
This is also why your countries social welfare systems are teetering on fiscal insolvency and deficits are ballooning. Your inefficient and non-competitive private sector isn't growing fast enough to fund your growing demand for free stuff in the public sector. Maybe if companies and entrepreneurs were allowed to shift more rapidly to meet market demand your legacy giants (and social welfare meal ticket) wouldn't be sitting ducks for the Chinese to swoop in and kill.
- wiseowise 8mo ago
  I'll take teetering on fiscal insolvency over one trip to ER makes you bankrupt and in debt for life if you don't have insurance, thank you.
  - SoftTalker 8mo ago
    > bankrupt and in debt for life Bankruptcy exists precisely so you are not in debt for life. It's a setback, but not irrecoverable.
- squidbeak 8mo ago
  It's amazing how reflexively the taunts always start with welfare. The case for prioritizing people over corporations shouldn't ever need to be made.
  - pembrook 8mo ago
    The private sector is who ultimately pays for the welfare, so if you care about people you need to prioritize the health of your corporations.
mh2266 8mo ago
what is the typical pay for SWEs in your country compared to https://www.levels.fyi/companies/block/salaries/software-engineer?country=254 https://www.levels.fyi/companies/block/salaries/software-eng... ?
Nifty3929 8mo ago
Are you glad to have people spending their lives on jobs that don't contribute to society, just because the business is already profitable? Wouldn't it be better to have those people move into whatever job would contribute more to society? Have you considered that allowing people to remain in jobs that contribute less than they could in other jobs is the reason why your per-capita production lags the US? The goal of the economy should be to move people quickly to where they can do the most good for society. Note that this has little to do with how hard these folks are working, how smart they are, or how 'worthy' they are. The point is just to have people doing the most useful work.
- throwaway-11-1 8mo ago
  Great point, thanks god we’re eliminating the majority of the creative arts industry with dogshit ai slop so people with actual talent can be redeployed to DoorDash or whatever (I guess until driverless cars can take that over?)
- torben-friis 8mo ago
  I am amazed to learn from you that usefulness and profit generation are interchangeable terms. I’m guessing that by that logic, narcos and casino owners should be celebrated, and running a charity should be a crime.

iddan 8mo ago

This is America. Like it or not.

nailer 8mo ago

What government makes it illegal for management to manage their company?

torben-friis 8mo ago
Many European countries, including mine (spain) only accept mass firings when the company proves it’s a necessity. Usually this means showing losses or the effect of force majeure events like natural disasters. You can manage your company just fine, by not overshooting your hiring by 2x if workers were anctually unneeded for example.
- acchow 8mo ago
  But in your country (Spain), Telefónica de España laid off 3649 workers in Dec 2023 (about 40% of that unit) despite growing net income by 17% that year.
  - torben-friis 8mo ago
    Nice googling, but that’s just an example that proves my point. They had to go through a process extensively justifying losses (mostly that certain jobs were no longer relevant as they were pre-digital workforce), negotiate with unions and offer voluntary leaving conditions. The resulting offer was good enough that more workers applied to be fired than were necesssary. For context, the deal was basically to pay them 70% of their current salary from the dismissal moment until their retirement at 63.
    - Klonoar 8mo ago
      What was the average age of the worker that took that deal?
- 121789 8mo ago
  spain has the highest unemployment rate in the EU. maybe you are ignoring important tradeoffs and are a little too confident about your own opinion on what it means to "manage your company just fine"
  - torben-friis 8mo ago
    Maybe, or maybe you’re about to find out what happens to the consumer side when a large percentage of companies decide they no longer need half their workforce judging on linkedin vibes.
  - askonomm 8mo ago
    Nope, that's Finland now. Spain is nr 2.
    - listeria 8mo ago
      But the definition of economically active differs between the two: Finland includes people from ages 15-89, while in Spain you need to be 16 or older. And judging from what I read the rise in unemployment in Finland is attributed to more people entering the workforce.

acchow 8mo ago

Can you point to the laws in your country that would make this illegal? I’m skeptical

input_sh 8mo ago
I can, easily. Speaking for my country and assuming you are not on a fixed-term contract, you can only get fired for one of the three reasons: 1. Company's in financial trouble and forced to downsize. 2. The position becomes obsolete and there's no option to transition you into some other role. In this case, the company can't hire anyone with a similar-enough skillset to yours for at least a year (or maybe even longer, I'm not sure). 3. Gross incompetence, in which case you need to be given an opportunity to course correct via a few documented warnings before being fired. Every warning requires your signature so that the company can't just make them up and backdate them. That said, you don't become a permanent employee on day one, a company can issue up to three fixed-term contract before being forced to give you a permanent one. If you're on a fixed-term contract, they can just not extend it without having to satisfy any of the criteria above. But after a maximum of 3 years at the same company (as the maximum length for a fixed-term contract is one year), the criteria for firing you increases drastically. So, the only way this could happen in my country is if the company stops renewing fixed-term contracts for recent employees, but then it wouldn't all be at the same time and you'd get the hint before the time comes to plan accordingly.
- drstewart 8mo ago
  >Speaking for my country I like how none of you ever reveal this mysterious country you're from, probably so you don't get called on the claims you're making. Anyway, in my country unemployment is 0% and everyone is rich and there are no problems. Why can't your country achieve the same?
  - timvdalen 8mo ago
    As an example, the comment you're replying to is true for The Netherlands

boxingdog 8mo ago

[dead]

atleastoptimal 8mo ago

This is part of the reason why American tech companies are so successful though. Being unable to lay off workers causes stagnation at companies where fast-development is paramount.

wiseowise 8mo ago
> This is part of the reason why American tech companies are so successful though. Nothing to do with biggest economy in the world for sure.
- atleastoptimal 8mo ago
  That helps, but there's a reason why the collective economy of the EU has produced only like 1/10 the number of unicorns over the past 30 years despite their GDP being around 2/3 the US's
  - orphea 8mo ago
    Almost like producing unicorns is not the single most important thing in the world.
    - atleastoptimal 8mo ago
      Well with respect to economic dynamism it ranks pretty highly.

groundzeros2015 8mo ago

Your country also pays less and has fewer jobs. Increasing the cost to fire, increases the cost to hire.

torben-friis 8mo ago
And yet we live longer and with higher quality of life, by most standards (chronic and mental illnesses, life expectancy, etc). No need to turn it into a dick measuring context, we have plenty of flaws of our own. Just pointing out that legal or not, under most morals systems, loudly proclaiming that you’re willing to screw your people for no clear necessity will get you socially ostracized.
- groundzeros2015 8mo ago
  > No need to turn it into a dick measuring context Yes, which is why it’s not helpful to bring up a completely different economic system with an unfamiliar culture. Why are you saying this in the next sentence: > yet we live longer and with higher quality of life
  - torben-friis 8mo ago
    >If the business is not able to be profitable everyone is screwed. Sure, we agree there. It’s not like needing profitability is a weird quirk of the American system. I am not criticizing the layoffs, but the layoffs while mentioning business is booming and they have no reasons forcing their hand. I’m curious about your point of view, would you applaud and support your employer taking this attitude? Firing half the workers while agreeing that there is no pressure to let anyone go looks good to you?
    - groundzeros2015 8mo ago
      > would you applaud and support your employer taking this attitude? I don’t see my employer as an owner or steward of me. I think we are in business relationship where both sides win. If circumstances change I understand I may need to find a new job.

pembrook 8mo ago

This is also why your countries social welfare systems are teetering on fiscal insolvency and deficits are ballooning. Your inefficient and non-competitive private sector isn't growing fast enough to fund your growing demand for free stuff in the public sector. Maybe if companies and entrepreneurs were allowed to shift more rapidly to meet market demand your legacy giants (and social welfare meal ticket) wouldn't be sitting ducks for the Chinese to swoop in and kill.

wiseowise 8mo ago
I'll take teetering on fiscal insolvency over one trip to ER makes you bankrupt and in debt for life if you don't have insurance, thank you.
- SoftTalker 8mo ago
  > bankrupt and in debt for life Bankruptcy exists precisely so you are not in debt for life. It's a setback, but not irrecoverable.
squidbeak 8mo ago
It's amazing how reflexively the taunts always start with welfare. The case for prioritizing people over corporations shouldn't ever need to be made.
- pembrook 8mo ago
  The private sector is who ultimately pays for the welfare, so if you care about people you need to prioritize the health of your corporations.

mh2266 8mo ago

what is the typical pay for SWEs in your country compared to https://www.levels.fyi/companies/block/salaries/software-engineer?country=254 https://www.levels.fyi/companies/block/salaries/software-eng... ?

Nifty3929 8mo ago

Are you glad to have people spending their lives on jobs that don't contribute to society, just because the business is already profitable? Wouldn't it be better to have those people move into whatever job would contribute more to society? Have you considered that allowing people to remain in jobs that contribute less than they could in other jobs is the reason why your per-capita production lags the US? The goal of the economy should be to move people quickly to where they can do the most good for society. Note that this has little to do with how hard these folks are working, how smart they are, or how 'worthy' they are. The point is just to have people doing the most useful work.

throwaway-11-1 8mo ago
Great point, thanks god we’re eliminating the majority of the creative arts industry with dogshit ai slop so people with actual talent can be redeployed to DoorDash or whatever (I guess until driverless cars can take that over?)
torben-friis 8mo ago
I am amazed to learn from you that usefulness and profit generation are interchangeable terms. I’m guessing that by that logic, narcos and casino owners should be celebrated, and running a charity should be a crime.