←back to thread

209 points htrp | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.47s | source
Show context
idkwhattocallme ◴[] No.44444622[source]
For the most part, I'm indifferent to layoffs. Companies over hire and then course correct. It's part of the game. But for MSFT, it rubs me the wrong way. In the past 5 years, their stock has soared (150% on stock and doubled in valuation). They are insanely profitable ($82B profit). They are diverse (no existential business risk). The fact that they are unceremoniously laying off 30K of the people that helped them get there drives home it's just a paycheck, do your job, but know it can and will end when convenient for the company. I know folks will argue, low performers, but really. This "productivity apps" company hired them, onboarded them, made $82B in profit, surely they can figure out how to uplevel folks. Also how do you have a layoff every couple of months for 3 years. Thinking about the middle class in the previous generation, it was unions that effectively ensured a labor job meant a secure future. I wonder if that's the solution (again).
replies(22): >>44444692 #>>44444744 #>>44444872 #>>44445007 #>>44445352 #>>44445600 #>>44445621 #>>44445705 #>>44445722 #>>44445743 #>>44445758 #>>44445853 #>>44445888 #>>44446540 #>>44446696 #>>44447236 #>>44447339 #>>44447678 #>>44447824 #>>44452199 #>>44452368 #>>44457573 #
stego-tech ◴[] No.44445853[source]
> Thinking about the middle class in the previous generation, it was unions that effectively ensured a labor job meant a secure future. I wonder if that's the solution (again).

It is, and they are. It’s why Reagan fired ATC strikers and blackballed them. It’s why private enterprise stockpiled machine guns and chemical weapons against strikers back in the Gilded Age. It’s why companies will spend billions to block Unions rather than just give workers the few million or so more they need over a decade to just maintain a standard of living. It’s why they’ll close down stores, warehouses, offshore jobs and outsource to contractors to penalize Unions.

Unions are a direct response to the inequality of Capital allocation and distribution.

replies(2): >>44446002 #>>44446952 #
aydyn ◴[] No.44446952[source]
Unions are not effective when there's such a surplus of labor and people willing to break lines. It wont work in today's tech labor market.
replies(4): >>44447366 #>>44448020 #>>44449626 #>>44457592 #
silisili ◴[] No.44448020[source]
Sure it would. There are way more employed tech people than unemployed. Imagine if every single person at a company like MS up and went on strike tomorrow.

Could MS replace them all with scabs? Sure, with enough time and money. But it wouldn't happen overnight, and things would get very dire if not company ruining in the meantime.

replies(2): >>44449647 #>>44451103 #
1. idkwhattocallme ◴[] No.44449647[source]
A digital strike by all employees for a week to get a collective bargaining agreement in place to show companies just how far AI has to go as a replacement would be powerful.
replies(1): >>44450027 #
2. ponector ◴[] No.44450027[source]
I'd argue nothing happens if everyone go on strike. It's not an assembly line. No release? Great. Noone to attend meetings? Not a big deal! Cannot get a real person for support? Same as without strike!
replies(3): >>44450215 #>>44451043 #>>44451507 #
3. WhyIsItAlwaysHN ◴[] No.44450215[source]
Outages would not be picked up
4. eviks ◴[] No.44451043[source]
> No release? Great.

What is great about your mission critical bug not getting fixed for a few more weeks?

5. ethbr1 ◴[] No.44451507[source]
I think you underappreciate what SRE does on a daily basis.