Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Justice4Ned t1_j8dnwzi wrote

30% cut considering the layoffs in September. The tech over hiring craze during the pandemic is really starting to show.

135

mdonaberger t1_j8f9c4x wrote

This is definitely not an overhiring, overcorrecting situation. This is a social contagion of companies laying people off to satisfy stakeholders who want blood for their profits.

Frankly, if they could just push employees into a wood chipper and harvest their platelets for sale, they would.

70

in-game_sext t1_j8gkz0o wrote

Live in the Bay, can confirm. The work culture here is toxic and evey time you turn around, companies are squeezing more work into less positions for the same pay.

18

dopef123 t1_j8h263l wrote

Depends on the company. Some people in tech have been living super easy for years since covid started. Source - also in bay area in tech

−1

BurstEDO t1_j8gtdl1 wrote

This is correct.

The hand-waving is "tech overhiring"; it's an inaccurate meme.

The reality is copycat effect, just like the late 21, early w2 "price increases" across all economic sectors, which fueled the inflation fire. Companies with material and logistics components experienced greater costs during and following the pandemic. That chewed up their margins, so many raised prices to maintain those margins.

Many/most who didn't even experience cost increases of any kind copied the herd raising prices as a way to inflate revenues. And most got away with it because "everyone else is doing it." Especially when the bulk of the market is making the same move, the ones that didn't "need" to raise prices exploited the opportunity anyway. As such, 9% inflation.

And now that the Fed has applied a vise grip Federal Interest Rate, many companies are now facing unfavorable borrowing costs; so they close ranks and ride out the cooldown, while also preparing for a Recession, should it manifest fully.

And since the consumer market is dealing with higher costs but suppressed, stagnant wages, spending is cooling off.

Finally, the last link in the chain reaction is companies looking for additional cost cutting avenues. Since growth is largely on hold due to revenues shrinking and borrowing costs becoming unprofitable, they turn inward and cut labor. Fringe or luxury products or projects are suspended (or shelved) and the staff is shuffled to keep the most vital members (and/or favoritism). And even firms that don't need to adjust labor costs are cutting labor preemptively to maintain margins since revenues are down across the board.

Everyone is at risk as long as the Fed maintains the high rates, which has been a necessity of evil to reign in the decades of low rate borrowing and growth all while wages failed to keep pace.

When inflation reaches 7-9% while wages **rarely surpass 1-4% annually, if that that's a disparity and it has been out of control for 20+ years.

13

dopef123 t1_j8h22i8 wrote

Have you looked at the stats? Tech companies hired way way more during covid than they've laid off so far.

Also they are beholden to the shareholder and have to pay big dividends or people will switch to bonds.

The government and fed create a lot of these situations. The corporations just do what is needed to win at the little game we've created.

−4

[deleted] t1_j8edlhu wrote

Some companies are doing it because they just want to do it. E.g Google, Meta, and Amazon. These companies have literal piles of cash but they would hide behind "stock is falling" to let people go.

47

4_teh_lulz t1_j8empyl wrote

Just because they have cash reserves doesnt mean they should hold on to employees. Employee headcount should match the size of the needs of the business.

41

bubba-yo t1_j8h7xkp wrote

Yeah, but it used to be if you were rolling those profits, you'd rely more on attrition to bring your staffing back in line and hold onto those employees you had already invested in. Hiring and releasing isn't cheap. You have good people, you work hard to hold onto them.

9

[deleted] t1_j8enkjl wrote

[deleted]

−11

pyrophire t1_j8eob20 wrote

Because its easier to throw more people at projects, than sort out lower performers.

When theres a want to reduce head count, then they can go look at lower performers and drop them.

27

red_dawn t1_j8evjxd wrote

Yep. Many times I saw a ‘Throw bodies at the problem’ band-aid instead of a proper ‘Let’s figure out why this problem is happening and come to a solution’ resolution with deficiencies.

Supports survey metrics tanked due to poor training and documentation or just flat out lazy teammates? Let’s put more bodies on the front line to offset it.

Did that fix it? No. You have more bad surveys because you now have MORE poorly trained people.

Tech debt/bug riddled code? Let’s throw more people at it. Surely more cooks in the kitchen will solve it. Not reviewing the problem and identifying where fixes need to be made.

Customers aren’t buying our software? More salespeople. Nothing to do with throwing everything and the kitchen sink into the initial package or their account teams now blowing them off since they got their commission. Now clients use 10% of the things you sold them and have no need for the other products…but your looking for the next thing to have them cut a check for?

It may be different at other companies but that’s what I saw at the one I was at before moving on.

15

dopef123 t1_j8h2cdv wrote

Because the economy was going up And tech was killing it because of all the demand from people doing work and school from home.

I work in tech and as frustrating as layoffs are they're part of the deal.

The average tech worker is finding a new job in 3 months. Many are also getting large severance packages. You don't really need to feel bad for us.

I make almost 200k and I wfh 3x days a week. Feel bad for people getting shitty wages and commuting not us

1

Butterykrisp t1_j8fhm7w wrote

Also, keeping talent to themselves so competitors can’t hire them might also be a reason.

0

4_teh_lulz t1_j8epna1 wrote

It's not inhumane. It is business.

They hired them in the first place because they poorly projected their revenues post-pandemic. Now they're correcting. If they hold on to these employees they risk putting the entire business at risk, which would be a far bigger disaster. That would un-employ everyone, not just a fraction of their workforce.

−3

ErnestT_bass t1_j8f3h49 wrote

I was contacted by a recruiter from meta asking if I was interested In a position they thought I would be a good fit...

Fk now you just literally announced layoffs.. WTF

6

BurstEDO t1_j8gtonu wrote

Yes and no.

Yes. They're trimming labor to adapt to a cooling economy and possible recession.

No; the rest of your speculation is financial illiterate.

The firms (large and small) trimming labor are doing so because so many others are as well, whether they need to or or not.

But "having cash reserves on hand" has no bearing on that. Publicly traded companies are not operated like your bank account.

−5

ACorania t1_j8fjwo6 wrote

This is really it. It is more of a correction in work force sizes once the crazy growth and cheap loans of the pandemic stopped. Most of them are still well above their pre-pandemic staffing levels even if they are now laying off.

2