Honestly, what a terrible letter. Did not once say the words layoff or let go. Using phrases like “continue to be part of klarna’s journey”. Good lord, is this a business or a cult? And not a single line about concrete steps they will take to support the layoffs (multi-month severance packages, etc). Hopefully that is what they intend, but as of right now, this is pretty disappointing.
From a Swedish perspective this is probably a "varsel" which is prior notice that they intend to do layoffs. You can't just fire people in Sweden so this is a first step. They have to give notice that they intent to layoff people to the different unions and then start the process. In other countries where they operate it's probably very different?
My guess is it will vary a lot how they do this because of first-in-first-out rules in Sweden they will have to get around to be able to layoff the people they want. I agree with the general sentiment though that the language is a bit vague, but this is a partial reason I think.
What a weird comment. The letter was perfectly fine. Firing a bunch of people is hard, impacts morale, and it's important to make sure people that you keep onboard don't panic. The letter didn't seem culty to me at all, and supporting layoffs was clearly addressed and will be done on regional-specific terms. Lawyers look at this kind of correspondence and tone down the language in some cases.
I feel it's better to use "fired" or "have to leave your job" or "layoff" or "terminate the employment contract" than "let go".
Because "let go" is to "allow someone or something to escape or go free" so it implies that you are the owner of the employee and you allow him to leave, just like as an ultimate humiliation he has to have your permission to go.
I actually found it a humane way of dealing with the situation.
They let everyone know in advance. Have the decency of individual communication. Anticipated what type of invite to expect. Promised to roll out quickly, in a matter of days.
I mean, probably not the "perfect" layoff, but certainly not close to worse, or even "terrible".
Another indicator consumer spending is dropping and costs are going through the roof. This is probably the first of a bunch of layoffs sadly. I expect Finances (Banks / Mortgage providers) are going to be aggressively reducing headcounts in the near future. One side of my family is heavily in that industry and they're all extremely nervous.
Sorry for anyone that lost their role, it's always tough to lose a job regardless of the company they worked for. I wish them all success and luck finding their next endeavor.
This is most likely not related to cash flows. This seems to be a preemptive strategic layoff to cut costs in preparation of tougher times to raise money / higher interest rates.
Why is this? Aren’t credit products something that consumers have used for decades? Is there something about Klarna that makes it unsuitable to use?
If you’re talking about securing funding to do the lending, then sure that makes sense. Is that your concern or is it around the business model itself?
Klarna seems like horrible company to work for from what I have read on HN. IQ test for interviews, mass layoffs with little self awareness, and very low pay compared to the US.
A horrible company for consumers too. Take those who can least afford to purchase something and give them purchasing power that they don't have and can't get from anyone else.
My company does an IQ test for interviews, but I rank it among the top places I've worked at in my career. Do you have any evidence that IQ tests are only done by companies that are bad places to work at?
Terrible communication in that letter, I love brutally honest and to the point communication. Everyone's time is precious don't beat around the bush just say:
we are laying off 10% of the companies staff due to macro-economic conditions beyond our control, this coupled with decreased customer spending and hiring like this day would never happen lead us to this decision. Sorry :(
I don't think you need to be brutal about it, but being more direct would have been better here. Someone else already captured the essence, but this was all over the place and still didn't really convey that 700 people were losing their jobs.
Not everyone would appreciate your style of communication. I, for example, certainly wouldn't. Unfortunately, it would be unfeasible to customize such a letter for each employee...
> The invite will be titled “Meeting regarding your role at Klarna”.
lol ouch! They should make it a gamble where everyone has a meeting and you don't know what the outcome will be! But since thats even more resource intensive I would much prefer a mass pre-recorded zoom call over that.
I can understand that the former thing has better PR than the latter thing. But I think employed Americans are more adept at the fickle nature of their employment, whereas when the news articles go out about a mass zoom meeting firing, it gets the attention and hot takes from a bunch of more disconnected unemployable Americans and out of the loop people from other developed nations chiming in.
What does it look like to fire someone in Europe? As an outsider, all I’ve heard is that it looks very different from the US. What does the author mean by ‘associated compensation’?
To me in the UK, "fire" generally refers to letting someone go because of incompetence, bad behaviour, or whatever - the role will still exist but the individual is let go. In which case you're entitled to whatever your contract says, which is probably "stop now and we'll pay off your notice period". Whereas layoffs and redundancies mean the roles are disappearing, the individuals being a side-effect (indeed, you aren't legally allowed to target individuals AIUI. Happy to be corrected on this, though)
I've never been fired, but I have been made redundant twice. Both times I'd not been in the role longer than 2 years which meant I was legally entitled to fuck all. First time, that's exactly what I got. Second time, the company was laying off such a significant proportion of staff that they were mandated to negotiate with those affected and come to an agreement about notice, pay, etc. They came with an OK offer; the employees requested a lot more; the company met us half way. Being entitled to nothing, I was very happy with what I ended up taking home :)
Depends on the legislation in the country of employment. In Sweden, the law covering this situation is LAS, Lag om Anställningsskydd, The Employment Protection Act.[1]
I'm not exactly an expert, but if you're going to lay people off you have to do it based on how long someone has been at the company. Before you can lay someone off for 'lack of work', you're also required to show that this person cannot fill another position at the company. The rules are definitely in favor of the worker in Sweden.
"Instead, if you are working in Europe, you will be offered to leave Klarna with an associated compensation"
Legislation and procedures depend on country. The quote above suggests that they intend to offer a voluntary redundancy package, which enables them to bypass a lot of hoops and red tape by offering you more than you would be legally entitled to if you agree to leave voluntarily. It is not uncommon.
In Germany and I assume similarly in Sweden, there are no "at will" work areas like most of the US is. Eliminating a position is very difficult to do because of the worker protection laws that are in place.
Usually there are a few steps that have to be followed depending on the circumstances, most of which involve providing thorough justification. Yes, the government agencies do care about this.
Further, we have periods of time after a position is severed that the company must also compensate or keep the employee employed (like notice periods, only they're on a schedule based on how long you've worked) that have to be respected by both sides unless agreed upon otherwise.
I would imagine they've figured out some sort of severance package or lump some that is a function of their salary. Just speculating.
It really depends on the country. In Denmark if a company have massive layoffs. You would probably continue working for a couple of month if you wanted to. Also the company world typically help employees with finding a new job, pay for extra training etc.
I don't think you will see much of the "you got two hours to pack your stuff and then you are out" like in the US. In Europe most people will "finish" their job independently of whether they were fire or quit them self.
In some EU countries it is common that the companies offer employees a “deal” to leave without laying off the staff. At least three months of salary in compensation is common. I know companies that handed out 3 or 6 months + 1 month for each year of employment in salary.
You may only get fired if you are deemed incompetent and have a higher position or does something silly. Not working is not enough.
For Finland fired is different from laid off. So you can fire someone if they repeatedly break instructions like OSHA related stuff, fraud or stealing and so on. Very high bar in reality. Laid off on other hand is longer process requiring negotiation between employer and employees, comes with payment from 2 weeks (under 1 year employment) to 6 months(over 12 years). Also in some case temporary layoff, like in the original meaning of term is possible. After sometime the employment continues like before with same contract and seniority.
Depends on your contract/the country... Americans here often forget that the EU isn't a single country, but countries have vastly different employment laws, like they have vastly different education and healthcare systems.
> However, unfortunately, some of you will be informed that we cannot offer you a role in the new organization
What new organization? They're laying off ~10%, not restructuring the whole business, or creating a wholly owned subsidiary, or even repositioning their product. Is there some kind of legal advantage being exploited here?
There can be, laying off people in Sweden is hard and one of the ways to do it is to claim that there is no work for an employee and so doing a reorganization can make it easier to claim that. Sweden's also got fairly strict last-in-first-out rules when firing. The way the company is organized affects whether two employees are in the same "circle" and compare to one another.
I think it's sad to see a CEO who doesn't seem to care all too much about hiding the fact that it isn't just the Ukraine, inflation, and it probably isn't the recession that is demanding this. It's everything he and his team did leading up to this. A convenient way also to use points at everything around us to justify a trim and rebalance of the culture and operating cost.
I always felt that good CEOs (from a culture perspective) make it clear that in times of trouble, the first priority is not the business, but everyone working there. Sure, all that won't matter if the business folds, but Klarna is a long way from crashing and there's a hundred and one firms out there ready to pay up to keep this going.
Bizarre. People expect either (a) company management to be completely clairvoyant about what the future will hold, or (b) when their best estimates about the future change, I guess folks expect management just continue charging ahead until their company goes bankrupt.
I also totally disagree with this statement, if you're implying that you think good CEOs should layoff as few people as possible: "I always felt that good CEOs (from a culture perspective) make it clear that in times of trouble, the first priority is not the business, but everyone working there."
If anything, I think good CEOs are clear about making tough, painful decisions, and they make them quickly and move on as fast as possible. There is nothing worse than everyone seeing the writing on the wall (e.g. lots of people with not enough work to do), but feeling that management is paralyzed by fear to change it.
What's going on is really not that complex. Companies (and MANY companies, certainly not just Klarna), planned for number of employees based on estimates about the future state of the world, and that future state of the world turned out to be drastically impacted by all the events mentioned in that letter.
Klarna feels like a feature to me, not a self sustaining business. I don't know what other capabilities they provide for merchants but I don't think BNPL can stand on its own, especially in a downturn.
1. Tells everyone that they’ll get an email in the next few days about whether or not they’re to be fired — days of anxiety ahead for everyone, and even those who aren’t being let go will be looking for new roles
2. Asking everyone to work from home, so those who are let go are isolated from their peers who they very probably want to commiserate with and say goodbye to
> 1. Tells everyone that they’ll get an email in the next few days about whether or not they’re to be fired — days of anxiety ahead for everyone, and even those who aren’t being let go will be looking for new roles
I love how half of the people will bitch that layoffs happened too suddenly without adequate warning, and the other half will bitch that they were given too much heads up.
Not knowing who will be there when you get back, having to go into the office with the anxiety of having to be the survivors even if it is only 10%.
With that said, it's a lose-lose. Layoffs suck. It sucks to know what is happening and see people led off, just like it sucks to be the one led off with the psychologically long walk to the meeting room.
atty|3 years ago
nisse2000|3 years ago
My guess is it will vary a lot how they do this because of first-in-first-out rules in Sweden they will have to get around to be able to layoff the people they want. I agree with the general sentiment though that the language is a bit vague, but this is a partial reason I think.
dvt|3 years ago
rvnx|3 years ago
Because "let go" is to "allow someone or something to escape or go free" so it implies that you are the owner of the employee and you allow him to leave, just like as an ultimate humiliation he has to have your permission to go.
rmbyrro|3 years ago
They let everyone know in advance. Have the decency of individual communication. Anticipated what type of invite to expect. Promised to roll out quickly, in a matter of days.
I mean, probably not the "perfect" layoff, but certainly not close to worse, or even "terrible".
foogazi|3 years ago
> However, unfortunately, some of you will be informed that we cannot offer you a role in the new organization.
Seems clear to me once you account for corporate speak
junon|3 years ago
ganoushoreilly|3 years ago
Sorry for anyone that lost their role, it's always tough to lose a job regardless of the company they worked for. I wish them all success and luck finding their next endeavor.
jdmoreira|3 years ago
ushakov|3 years ago
startups can’t exist without free vc cash that’s going to be tight soon-ish
altdataseller|3 years ago
Klarna can only exist in a bubble.
nindalf|3 years ago
If you’re talking about securing funding to do the lending, then sure that makes sense. Is that your concern or is it around the business model itself?
rvnx|3 years ago
nowherebeen|3 years ago
buro9|3 years ago
occz|3 years ago
Nuzzerino|3 years ago
distracted_boy|3 years ago
throwaway5959|3 years ago
Pixeleen|3 years ago
the vast majority of Klarnauts won’t be impacted
It's not the time to use this made-up name for insiders when you're saying that many of them will soon be outsiders.
"Will all the Klarnauts please step forward. Not so fast, Jake."
dt3ft|3 years ago
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]
christkv|3 years ago
Meeting regarding your role at Klarna
subsubzero|3 years ago
we are laying off 10% of the companies staff due to macro-economic conditions beyond our control, this coupled with decreased customer spending and hiring like this day would never happen lead us to this decision. Sorry :(
zucked|3 years ago
matwood|3 years ago
There's also space between what was said in this letter and brutal honesty. It should be concise and clear.
rmbyrro|3 years ago
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]
Yhippa|3 years ago
vmception|3 years ago
> The invite will be titled “Meeting regarding your role at Klarna”.
lol ouch! They should make it a gamble where everyone has a meeting and you don't know what the outcome will be! But since thats even more resource intensive I would much prefer a mass pre-recorded zoom call over that.
I can understand that the former thing has better PR than the latter thing. But I think employed Americans are more adept at the fickle nature of their employment, whereas when the news articles go out about a mass zoom meeting firing, it gets the attention and hot takes from a bunch of more disconnected unemployable Americans and out of the loop people from other developed nations chiming in.
rmbyrro|3 years ago
There's no way to please everyone. Especially in a mass lay-off.
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]
christkv|3 years ago
ushakov|3 years ago
make a fortune wheel with each employee’s name on it and fire anybody who’s got lucky
aabhay|3 years ago
darrenf|3 years ago
I've never been fired, but I have been made redundant twice. Both times I'd not been in the role longer than 2 years which meant I was legally entitled to fuck all. First time, that's exactly what I got. Second time, the company was laying off such a significant proportion of staff that they were mandated to negotiate with those affected and come to an agreement about notice, pay, etc. They came with an OK offer; the employees requested a lot more; the company met us half way. Being entitled to nothing, I was very happy with what I ended up taking home :)
occz|3 years ago
I'm not exactly an expert, but if you're going to lay people off you have to do it based on how long someone has been at the company. Before you can lay someone off for 'lack of work', you're also required to show that this person cannot fill another position at the company. The rules are definitely in favor of the worker in Sweden.
[1] https://www.government.se/government-policy/labour-law-and-w...
mytailorisrich|3 years ago
Legislation and procedures depend on country. The quote above suggests that they intend to offer a voluntary redundancy package, which enables them to bypass a lot of hoops and red tape by offering you more than you would be legally entitled to if you agree to leave voluntarily. It is not uncommon.
junon|3 years ago
Usually there are a few steps that have to be followed depending on the circumstances, most of which involve providing thorough justification. Yes, the government agencies do care about this.
Further, we have periods of time after a position is severed that the company must also compensate or keep the employee employed (like notice periods, only they're on a schedule based on how long you've worked) that have to be respected by both sides unless agreed upon otherwise.
I would imagine they've figured out some sort of severance package or lump some that is a function of their salary. Just speculating.
kasperni|3 years ago
I don't think you will see much of the "you got two hours to pack your stuff and then you are out" like in the US. In Europe most people will "finish" their job independently of whether they were fire or quit them self.
AtNightWeCode|3 years ago
You may only get fired if you are deemed incompetent and have a higher position or does something silly. Not working is not enough.
praptak|3 years ago
This assumes employment under the labor law. In IT it's quite popular for employees to provide service as one person companies.
Ekaros|3 years ago
christkv|3 years ago
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]
throw_m239339|3 years ago
BurningFrog|3 years ago
There is no unified "Europe" where things are done the same way.
There are ~50 very diverse countries in Europe, and things will vary widely.
This is even true, though a bit less so, for the 27 EU member states.
jdmoreira|3 years ago
yobbo|3 years ago
throwaway5959|3 years ago
[deleted]
tejohnso|3 years ago
What new organization? They're laying off ~10%, not restructuring the whole business, or creating a wholly owned subsidiary, or even repositioning their product. Is there some kind of legal advantage being exploited here?
mingusrude|3 years ago
mittermayr|3 years ago
I always felt that good CEOs (from a culture perspective) make it clear that in times of trouble, the first priority is not the business, but everyone working there. Sure, all that won't matter if the business folds, but Klarna is a long way from crashing and there's a hundred and one firms out there ready to pay up to keep this going.
hn_throwaway_99|3 years ago
I also totally disagree with this statement, if you're implying that you think good CEOs should layoff as few people as possible: "I always felt that good CEOs (from a culture perspective) make it clear that in times of trouble, the first priority is not the business, but everyone working there."
If anything, I think good CEOs are clear about making tough, painful decisions, and they make them quickly and move on as fast as possible. There is nothing worse than everyone seeing the writing on the wall (e.g. lots of people with not enough work to do), but feeling that management is paralyzed by fear to change it.
What's going on is really not that complex. Companies (and MANY companies, certainly not just Klarna), planned for number of employees based on estimates about the future state of the world, and that future state of the world turned out to be drastically impacted by all the events mentioned in that letter.
dannyw|3 years ago
physicsguy|3 years ago
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]
sam_lowry_|3 years ago
1. https://www.politico.eu/tech-28-2022/
40acres|3 years ago
krfsm|3 years ago
It's pretty much a Stripe competitor, plus BNPL.
sidebits|3 years ago
schdnFreud|3 years ago
[deleted]
phphphphp|3 years ago
1. Tells everyone that they’ll get an email in the next few days about whether or not they’re to be fired — days of anxiety ahead for everyone, and even those who aren’t being let go will be looking for new roles
2. Asking everyone to work from home, so those who are let go are isolated from their peers who they very probably want to commiserate with and say goodbye to
What a terrible self-inflicted error.
hn_throwaway_99|3 years ago
I love how half of the people will bitch that layoffs happened too suddenly without adequate warning, and the other half will bitch that they were given too much heads up.
madamelic|3 years ago
Not knowing who will be there when you get back, having to go into the office with the anxiety of having to be the survivors even if it is only 10%.
With that said, it's a lose-lose. Layoffs suck. It sucks to know what is happening and see people led off, just like it sucks to be the one led off with the psychologically long walk to the meeting room.