3 ms·

Does anyone know why this layoff occurred? Was it a case of their designs maturing, and thus SpaceX no longer needing the large R&D staff they previously did?

• krastanov 12y ago
  It happened a week after their annual review cycle. Their version is that it was just removing underperforming staff. They also claim that they plan to grow their workforce by 20% this year (the layoffs was 5% of the workforce). EDIT: Also, their RnD program is still going strong, especially so with the new engines and the plan for their 10m diameter rocket.
  • indlebe 12y ago
    >Their version is that it was just removing under performing staff. It's too bad we won't know if there was a formal employee review process in place and if these employees were aware that they were "underperforming".
• krschultz 12y ago
  The loss of up to 200 jobs at Space Exploration Technologies Corp. is due to firing of “low performer” employees as part of its annual review process, and not layoffs, the company’s president said July 26. [1] That sounds like trying to dodge officially having a layoff, or pretty shitty company culture. I wonder what other SpaceX employees think of the matter. I didn't see much news about it. [1] http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/41428spacex-says-%E2%80%9Cheadcount-reduction%E2%80%9D-due-to-annual-reviews-not-layoffs http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/41428spacex-s...
  • bostonvaulter2 12y ago
    Is there something inherently wrong with firing "low performers" rather than laying them off?
    • ctdonath 12y ago
      Question is whether they are actually "low performers", or just culled as most of the staff became unnecessary and legalisms lead to one choice of euphemism over another.
    • krschultz 12y ago
      Well, generally speaking "firing" reduces the amount of unemployment insurance you get, while a layoff gets you the full amount. So an employer that shrouds a layoff in a firing is screwing the employee twice. I generally think that the employer should have a very high bar on proving that it was performance based when you are laying off significant % of the workforce at one time. Every time I was involved in an employee firing, it happened out of phase with the typical performance review cycle, and it was typically one person at a time.
      • seanflyon 12y ago
        > "firing" reduces the amount of unemployment insurance you get Could you describe how this works? Do you get unemployment for a longer period of time or larger payments if you were laid off?
        • ranran876 12y ago
          severance pay is given out for layoffs and not firings. It always seemed like a weird system to me b/c if you're laying people off, you're probably already strapped for cash - so you'd try to find an excuse to fire the person.
          • FireBeyond 12y ago
            Yes and no... if your fiscal management is that shoddy that severance is a problem, you're beyond screwed as a company. The idea is that "Well, we're running down our funds, best to get these people out the door now with x month's salary, rather than hope something turns around in x+y months."