Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

WhatTheZuck420 t1_j6ienz1 wrote

Paywalled. But the title sounds about right.

58

digiorno t1_j6il2dm wrote

> In Silicon Valley, the new year began as the last one ended — with tens of thousands of tech workers losing their jobs. Just a few days into 2023, Amazon Chief Executive Andrew Jassy announced that there would be 18,000 layoffs across the company. Within weeks, Microsoft revealed it was slashing its head count by 10,000 and Google said that it was terminating 12,000 employees. IBM looks to be next, with nearly 4,000 workers on the chopping block.

>This follows 2022’s bloodbath, when tens of thousands of jobs were lost at Meta Platforms, Twitter and Salesforce. According to an industry layoff tracker, the tech sector has eliminated some 220,000 jobs since the start of last year. If the laid-off tech workers formed a city, it’d be one of the most populous in the United States, bigger than Des Moines or Salt Lake City.

>The question is: Why have many of the most profitable companies of our generation — most of which are still very much profitable — announced staggering rounds of layoffs, one after the other? And why now?

>A common refrain from analysts and reporters is that the companies are “tightening their belts” after profligate pandemic hiring sprees, in order to streamline operations. The executives overseeing the cuts, for their part, cite adverse economic circumstances. “We hired for a different economic reality than the one we face today,” Google CEO Sundar Pichai said in his layoff announcement. Jassy wrote that “Amazon has weathered uncertain and difficult economies in the past, and we will continue to do so.” Microsoft’s Satya Nadella noted that “some parts of the world are in a recession and other parts are anticipating one.”

>No recession has yet hit the U.S. or its tech sector. Inflation hurts, but the U.S. economy added hundreds of thousands of jobs last month. Still, certain shareholders have been vocal about their desire to see head counts trimmed — and trimmed further still.

>To that end, critics argue that simple greed is driving the layoffs; they point to the tens of billions’ worth of stock buybacks the tech companies authorized last year. The Verge’s Liz Lopatto spoke with industry analysts who said that tech companies are evaluating their bottom lines differently, and concluded that they’re doing layoffs mostly because everyone else is, even though layoffs actually often cost a given company money. And the fact all these layoffs are happening in such rapid succession gives the companies some cover — making them seem elemental, inevitable.

> Company bikes sit outside an office building on Google's Mountain View campus. TECHNOLOGY AND THE INTERNET

>So what’s really going on here? The answer may actually be pretty simple.

>“Controlling labor costs via periodic layoffs is like breathing for Silicon Valley: cyclical, necessary for life,” Malcolm Harris, author of the forthcoming book “Palo Alto: A History of California, Capitalism and the World,” told me. The layoffs, Harris says, have “very little to do with long- or even medium-term strategy except as it pertains to cultivating an insecure workforce.”

>That tracks with the economic reality we do face today, as a tech CEO might put it. Because while a recession has not yet arrived in any meaningful form, there is another economic indicator pointing to the desirability of layoffs, from a large employer’s perspective: a growing effort to organize tech workers in an unusually tight labor market.

>Tech employees’ salaries have skyrocketed over the last two years, and their bargaining power has begun to grow too. Over the last half-decade, workers in the tech industry have agitated for changes that executives have found increasingly inconvenient.

>At Google, they’ve spoken up against gender inequalities and pressured the company to drop a lucrative defense contract. At Amazon and Microsoft, they’ve protested lackluster climate policies and spurred those companies to make pledges to reduce carbon emissions. At Facebook and Twitter, workers rallied against content moderation decisions around keeping former President Trump on the platform after Jan. 6, 2021. A subset of Google employees formed the Alphabet Workers Union with the Communication Workers of America union, Amazonians founded the Amazon Employees for Climate Justice, and at Microsoft, employees at a video game subsidiary, ZeniMax, formed the first certified union ever to be recognized by the company.

>The concrete gains won by organizing tech workers so far may be relatively small, but the rising salaries and growing organizing capacity threaten the tech giants’ bottom line and the brand of executive sovereignty that’s prized in Silicon Valley. Elon Musk’s mass firings at Twitter last year, and his public demand that only “hardcore” coders dedicated to his program remain at the company, are instructive here, not least because other tech executives have said his approach was an inspiration when culling jobs at their own companies.

> Twitter headquarters is shown in San Francisco, Friday, Oct. 28, 2022. Elon Musk has taken control of Twitter after a protracted legal battle and months of uncertainty. The question now is what the billionaire Tesla CEO will actually do with the social media platform.(AP Photo/Jeff Chiu) BUSINESS

>Workers in an industry that had long been famously union-agnostic at best had been forming bonds, organizing and developing solidarity. Layoffs of this scale and suddenness can be a blow to that process.

>Affected tech workers told me that they were struck by the randomness of the firings; senior members of staff in good standing, brilliant colleagues with sterling performance reviews, all shown the door, with little rhyme or reason. Many seemed to wonder why they were spared while their peers weren’t.

>Alejandra Beatty, a technical program manager at Alphabet subsidiary Verily, told me it was “very much a surprise” when she was laid off this month. For one thing, she had known herself to be in good standing at the company. “I was high performance, considered one of the pillars of the local community in the Boulder, Colo., office. Now I’m not even allowed to go back in, not even as a visitor,” she said. Beatty was also struck by how many of those let go were performing functions crucial to keeping “core products” working.

>If there’s one thing that firing people in a large-scale and seemingly random way accomplishes, it’s instilling a sense of precarity, even fear, in those who remain.

>“It’s completely devastating,” said Skylar Hinnant, a senior quality assurance tester at Microsoft’s ZeniMax subsidiary, “both to the people who are laid off and their families, and their colleagues, who felt, for that day and will feel it a long time after, that they’re at risk.”

>Hinnant said he knew plenty of people who lost their jobs across Microsoft — everyone does. “You can be the most important engineer at your job, you can be an awesome programmer, at the end of the day if the algorithm wants you gone you’re gone.”

> In this Sept. 24, 2019, file photo, a woman walks below a Google sign on the campus in Mountain View, Calif. Google is in the crosshairs of U.S. antitrust regulators who accuse it of wrongdoing similar to charges Microsoft faced 22 years ago, when Google was starting out in a Silicon Valley garage. How Google grew from its idealistic roots into what regulators describe as a cutthroat behemoth is a story shaped by unbridled ambition, savvy decision making, technology’s networking effects, lax regulatory oversight and the pressure to pump up profits. (

>“I think it’s waking people up to some realities of what the industry is really like,” Alejandra Beatty said. “We are workers. Even though we have benefits and we are highly trained — we’re still workers. We can still arbitrarily lose our jobs like anyone else.”

>Beatty had been a visible member of the AWU, advocating in media interviews for reproductive rights in the workplace. She was always civil and constructive, she says, and felt her suggestions had been well-received by management. Now she thinks a lot about whether her termination was retaliatory. Ultimately, she decided the layoffs were too large, too automated to have targeted her directly. “I think I was yet another number in whatever crazy algorithm the consulting company used to figure out the cuts,” she said.

134

happyscrappy t1_j6k6rcz wrote

> In Silicon Valley, the new year began as the last one ended — with tens of thousands of tech workers losing their jobs. Just a few days into 2023, Amazon Chief Executive Andrew Jassy announced that there would be 18,000 layoffs across the company. Within weeks, Microsoft revealed it was slashing its head count by 10,000 and Google said that it was terminating 12,000 employees. IBM looks to be next, with nearly 4,000 workers on the chopping block.

3 of those 4 companies are not Silicon Valley companies.

9

WhatTheZuck420 t1_j6p3q8w wrote

not in location but in mindset lol

1

happyscrappy t1_j6p4hk1 wrote

I guess. But the article veers from that too. It counts Capital One and Carvana as tech. And I only got down to the Cs to see those!

Honestly it looks like the article is just bundling up nearly any company that uses computers in their business and laid off as "tech" (or Silicon Valley in that paragraph).

Carvana puts thousands of car salesmen on the street because the leadership can't figure out how to properly track car titles and it's part of a "tech layoff trend to bring workers to heel".

BTW, a friend's actual Silicon Valley, actual tech (and I don't mean selling mattresses over the internet) company laid off today. About 3.5% of headcount. So there is something there. I just think it's being massively misrepresented here.

1

krum t1_j6l47ns wrote

Didn’t IBM just publish some bullshit about how laying people off wasn’t the IBM way?

6

FettLife t1_j6lo2oe wrote

NGL, commenting “paywalled” in an article about mass layoffs is quite meta.

2