3 ms·

A bit off-topic, but I'm curious: why do so many people seem to be outraged when companies do layoffs? I genuinely don't understand. It's like there's this unsp

A bit off-topic, but I'm curious: why do so many people seem to be outraged when companies do layoffs? I genuinely don't understand. It's like there's this unspoken agreement that once you get hired, you're entitled to that job for life. Of course, you are free to leave whenever you want, nothing wrong with that, but many seem to see it as immoral or unethical for the company to decide they don't need you anymore, and let you go. Why? What exactly is a company's moral obligation when it comes to who they employ and for how long? For context, I was most recently employed at a public tech company as a staff engineer. I was there for five years, got paid very well, and then was part of broad layoffs last year. I got a generous severance, and moved onto the next thing. I don't have any bitterness about it; I was selling my time and expertise to the company, and they no longer felt it was worth buying. I wouldn't have felt bad about leaving the job, so why should they feel bad about ending the employment? Don't get me wrong, I know how stressful layoffs are. But all kinds of things in life are stressful (like a breakup, for example), but that doesn't imply you've been morally harmed in some way. You aren't entitled to keep your job for life! Help me understand.

eudamoniac 6mo ago
Yeah I'm with you, I think 99% of the reaction is just anger that big corp took away small workers' job, with no further thought. To try to steelman it best I can, maybe it's the feeling that a successful company should (ethically) pass on the success to the workers in some way. Like, my labor resulted in record revenue, but instead of a raise I'm getting fired. Feels bad. Also if workers reacted game theoretically correctly to this situation, they would work just enough to not get fired for cause, since working hard is not rewarded. This is overall bad because if everyone starts doing the bare minimum it's not a pleasant place to work. So it's basically the company forcing the workplace into becoming worse, and actually harming themselves in the long run if everyone reacted that way, so the company is being shortsighted. So then the workers are mad because the company isn't even laying them off for "rational" reasons. Once you accept that employment is just a roulette wheel that you spin quarterly, it becomes less frustrating, but also becomes more soul sucking.
- senordevnyc 6mo ago
  Yeah, I suspect that some of my bewilderment is that I've been self-employed for the vast majority of my career; that 5-year stint at a big tech company was an anomaly, and I always viewed it as just another client, essentially. And clients and customers come and go, constantly. I've never felt entitled to their business, and I suppose I extend that same thinking to employment. I will say that I don't think game theory would dictate that you do as little as you can to not get fired, for at least a few different reasons. First of all, that's pretty difficult to do, since you don't know in advance exactly what the dividing line is between who gets fired or laid off, and who doesn't. Second, my experience has been that people who do take that approach are statistically more likely to get laid off, when compared to people who really push hard at work, trying to win. And even if the latter group does get laid off, they're much more competitive in the job market if they have a solid body of work and a network of former colleagues who view them favorably. And third, having gone through a phase like that when I was getting divorced, it just feels shitty. I'd much rather pull my weight, regardless of whether my job continues in the future. I do think that game theory would certainly imply that you should not have any loyalty towards your employer, and be willing to jump ship whenever it makes sense for you. But that has always been the case, at least in my lifetime.

eudamoniac 6mo ago

Yeah I'm with you, I think 99% of the reaction is just anger that big corp took away small workers' job, with no further thought. To try to steelman it best I can, maybe it's the feeling that a successful company should (ethically) pass on the success to the workers in some way. Like, my labor resulted in record revenue, but instead of a raise I'm getting fired. Feels bad. Also if workers reacted game theoretically correctly to this situation, they would work just enough to not get fired for cause, since working hard is not rewarded. This is overall bad because if everyone starts doing the bare minimum it's not a pleasant place to work. So it's basically the company forcing the workplace into becoming worse, and actually harming themselves in the long run if everyone reacted that way, so the company is being shortsighted. So then the workers are mad because the company isn't even laying them off for "rational" reasons. Once you accept that employment is just a roulette wheel that you spin quarterly, it becomes less frustrating, but also becomes more soul sucking.

senordevnyc 6mo ago
Yeah, I suspect that some of my bewilderment is that I've been self-employed for the vast majority of my career; that 5-year stint at a big tech company was an anomaly, and I always viewed it as just another client, essentially. And clients and customers come and go, constantly. I've never felt entitled to their business, and I suppose I extend that same thinking to employment. I will say that I don't think game theory would dictate that you do as little as you can to not get fired, for at least a few different reasons. First of all, that's pretty difficult to do, since you don't know in advance exactly what the dividing line is between who gets fired or laid off, and who doesn't. Second, my experience has been that people who do take that approach are statistically more likely to get laid off, when compared to people who really push hard at work, trying to win. And even if the latter group does get laid off, they're much more competitive in the job market if they have a solid body of work and a network of former colleagues who view them favorably. And third, having gone through a phase like that when I was getting divorced, it just feels shitty. I'd much rather pull my weight, regardless of whether my job continues in the future. I do think that game theory would certainly imply that you should not have any loyalty towards your employer, and be willing to jump ship whenever it makes sense for you. But that has always been the case, at least in my lifetime.