this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2024
361 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

57453 readers
4676 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Fearing social media backlash, companies are using all kinds of euphemisms to avoid being straightforward about layoffs — ‘right-sized’, ‘org changes’, ‘simplified operating model’::Managers are running out of ways to say you no longer have a job, but the way the bad news is delivered is more important than ever.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 21 points 6 months ago (4 children)

So they've hired too much people and now they need to let them go. Why doesn't this have consequences for the people hiring in the first place? It is your responsibility to adapt to market changes but when you mess up, your head is not on the line?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago

If you fuck up at work you get fired. If your work fucks up, you get fired. How is that fair?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Because over hiring is not a fireable offense and it wouldn't make sense that it would be? Say you have a manager of 10 programmers and company sales projections day you're getting 20% more business that year, so you get approved to hire 2 new programmers. Turns out you only increase by 10% and more there's nothing for 1 new programmer to do.

Do you fire the hiring manager? They were just going by the corporate plan and moreover you still need a manager. You still need sales guys. The only one not doing anything is the programmer. Doesn't have to be the new person fired but the worst programmer needs to be moved somewhere where they're needed, or fired.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I am not saying you fire some hiring manager but I'm saying fire who is responsible for hiring more people than you need. Clearly someone is not doing their job properly or you wouldn't get these mass firings.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Weak labor laws? Where I live after 3 months (with some exceptions) they can't just fire you. They pretty much have to prove you're incapable of working or that the position will no longer exist (which in this scenario is probably not even possible) or have a collective layoff with some serious benefits for the laid off workers. I've seen some companies try to kinda coerce people into quitting to get around the laws (because they're so much pain in the ass for shitty companies), but at that point you just have to stick to your rights and tell them to get fucked because they can't do shit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Because it's not true. It feels believable, but it's a lie. Everyone, especially at the top, know this so no one is punished.