If I were asked back I'd take it (hopefully with an increase in salary) then I'd actively search for another job. Once I landed it I'd give zero day notice. Fuck them.
I understand I could be potentially hurting coworkers by adding additional work to their plate but Twitter didn't give 2 shits about the people left behind and the work that they would have to take on.
Why is it corporations can "layoff" without notice but as an employee you are expected to give 2 weeks notice? I guess one could argue that if the corp gives a severance pay then that makes up for sudden layoff. But it doesn't. Even if I have a savings for emergencies employee sponsored health insurance will eventually end. Then COBRA kicks in and there goes your emergency savings if you have a family.
Of course the whole U.S. health insurance shit-show is for another discussion but when you have a family AND a serious health issues, health insurance is front and center on one's mind.
If I never had to worry about health insurance and have the ability to go get the care I need/want would take a huge burden off of my shoulders and I'm sure I'm not alone.
The U.S. healthcare system traps people in companies, for fear of losing access to reliable healthcare. A system that was completely independent from employers would be much more beneficial to employees. Plus, it would save huge administrative costs for private companies. This would especially benefit small companies, but, really, it would make the job of running any company much easier.
Since the workers mostly aren't actually fired, but in a no-access, no-duties period between notice and dismissal while still employed and on payroll, its “resume duties, quit, or be fired for cause”.
> Why is it corporations can "layoff" without notice but as an employee you are expected to give 2 weeks notice?
Both sides can equally give as much notice as they want. 2 weeks is only customary, but also seems to be rarely honored on both sides. If an employee gives 2 weeks, they’re often just walked out the door and stay on the payroll for 2 weeks (for any job more complex than menial tasks, no meaningful transition can be completed in 2 weeks, so it’s better to reduce any risks immediately). Companies often give severance packages longer than 2 weeks to avoid being sued, on condition of signing some paperwork to that effect.
The company needs to bite the bullet to secure a short-term contract that stipulates certain things need to be done on a (expensive) fixed-cost basis. No reason to expect any of these employees to work the same way anymore, and they might even present some risk, so extra carrot is needed to keep them around for critical duties and hand-over.
I would probably take the job and proceed to do fuck all until they fired me again.
A company tried to get me to come back and do handover after terminating a contract in breach a few years back. Agreement was a month. I did nothing for the entire month because they didn’t specify a deliverable. Due to working through an agency that was larger than the company I got paid and they got told to piss off when they complained.
That is certainly a hot take. When a company is losing $4 million a day drastic measures are in order to save the company so the remaining employees still have a job. Having worked in tech for over 20 years and being on both sides of layoffs I can tell you how hard it is for the people making the decision of who to layoff is exceedingly difficult and heart breaking.
It definitely looks like Twitter was a hot mess and needed an amputation to save the patient.
Swoop in to the sounds of Jan Hammer’s Crocketts Theme with his Tesla staff entourage, you’re fired you’re fired, sit down, hack the planet, job done, planet bows before him, free speech restored.
How it turned out:
“Um, boss, we’ve spent the last three days trying to get a build running in Jenkins. Might want to get the dudes you fired back.”. While all the advertisers distance themselves from the unravelling incel, racist, sexist shit show.
From the moment that he started to fight off this purchase in court, it's needed a lot of mental gymnastics to defend the genius of his moves regarding the purchase of an underperforming social network.
Are these the plays of a proverbial multi-dimensional chess genius that are beyond mortal ken, or one clumsy attempt after another to salvage a bad situation that he put himself in?
In some other HN thread related to this, people worked out the math behind the layoff of half of Twitter's workforce days into taking over: assuming revenue remained the same, the company would be profitable enough to cover the loans taken to purchase (with itself as collateral!)
Actually, this is in line with the philosophy at Tesla's/Elon companies of "if you're not occasionally replacing components you deleted, then you aren't removing enough."
This article says they are trying to bring back "dozens" of employees. 3700 were fired. Of those apparently some were fired due to clerical error. What is there to explain?
There is a bunch of mass layoffs happening in other tech companies (and across the economy), are we going to pretend they will all go smoothly?
Actually come to think of it, without this acquisition Twitter would still have been forced to let a bunch of people go anyhow regardless of who happens to be the CEO. Possibly just as many. Probably with less severance... but definitely with nicer emails...
I personally can't wait for the high strung emotions on both sides to die out. There are people that actively cheer for Elon to fail and to take the entire company with him, and others that actively hope he's going to single-handedly restore free speech.
Meanwhile.. it's a corporation that trades in short messages between it's users. Is any of this really worth the emotional investment? It's an odd time in America, but casting all your hopes and dreams through the lens of what Elon Musk does today or where Twitter is tomorrow seems to me to be the worst way to approach it.
“This is why Elon is a genius for keeping these employees on staff for 3 months instead of laying them off; now he can just get them back to work or they refuse and he saves 3 months of salary!”
Tuning a guitar string often involves going too low and then raising back up to the right note. Disruptive to the workers, but Musk is tuning a guitar not running a daycare - requirements and concerns are different. I’m sure he’s less worried about the optics of correction than you are. Add your own value judgements accordingly.
Personally I can’t make myself see this as a humanitarian disaster — these employees have known the risk was on the horizon for many months, are eminently employable, high-functioning, with presumably good professional networks and resumes. They’ll land on their feet, and have themselves to blame if they didn’t prepare accordingly. Plenty of other drama in the world to worry about, much of it more severe than ex-twitter ee’s on the open job market thirsty for talent.
The pro-Elon redpill here is that he's already had at least 4 unambiguously successful companies (zip2, Paypal, Tesla, SpaceX). So maybe we are just observing what it takes to be extremely successful: Move fast and break stuff. If you want to be a multibillionaire you're going to have to make a lot of big mistakes, faster than anyone thinks possible.
Additionally I think "verified users get priority in replies" has the potential to be absolutely killer. Everyone knows that clout chasing is huge on Twitter. I could easily see a spiral like so:
* Initially 5% of daily actives buy the check marks, mostly just to own the libs (Fox News loves Elon btw). But the newborn blue checks are everywhere in replies. They're accumulating followers like no tomorrow.
* Others begin to follow suit. $8/month is a small price to pay for clout. Remember, that's what they're all there for. "If anyone tells you they don't want more twitter followers, they're lying."
* 10% of the userbase has bought a blue check. 20%. The anti-Elon folks are holding out. But their voices are growing quieter and quieter.
* The entire tenor of the site begins to change. The loudest voices are the Elon fans who bought the check mark early. His politics become dominant on the site.
* Eventually the anti-Elon folks either ragequit or end up purchasing the checkmark. Petty tyranny and clout chasing are kind of their thing. It's a case of irresistible force meets immovable object. Endgame seems hard to predict.
If you’re reading this, and Twitter wants you back, I hope you ask for a contract with a year’s pay in advance, due before returning to work, at 10x your prior rate.
After all, you must be one of those 10x developers if Elon is willing to eat crow and ask you to come back.
Just having those emails in hand would be almost a voucher for negotiating higher salary when looking for another job, they certify that you were one of the people that were vital for Twitter to run.
There’s likely no negotiations. More of a “could you come back please?” And you either accept because you don’t have anything lined up or tell them to go pound sand
Sounds familiar. Where I worked years ago, the company asked for volunteers to be laid off, many people, took the package (1 years salary). IT was not allowed to volunteer.
Mang. did not keep count, some Departments were emptied out. So after a couple of weeks, many people were re-hired and was able to keep their '1 year salary bonus'.
Many people in IT left once the re-hirings happened. The company went chapter 11 about 5 years later.
"Allegedly Oracle did this years ago when they had layoffs-- employees were let go, then asked if they wanted to return. Apparently, if they said no, the company considered the exit a resignation instead of a layoff, and would refuse severance. If oracle was then taken to court over the lack of severance by former employees, those employees' refusal to rejoin the company could be used to avoid an unfavorable ruling for Oracle."
If part of the fitness criteria involved printing out code written in the last 6 months on paper, it was predictable that they would have accidentally let go of many important contributors in a 50% layoff. Color me not surprised.
Turns out running a large technology platform takes more than just wishful thinking and personal brand stunts.
It was pretty obvious from the speed of the layoffs that this would happen. No way they would be able to accurately suss out everyone that would be needed in a few days.
They prioritised speed over accuracy, which I can actually respect. Question is how hard it's going to bite them.
What I like about this is that Elon apparently made this call by counting SLOCs printed on paper, and then stack ranked them. Clearly the man is a genius, and he will save Twitter.
You cannot audit performance at a software company by SLOC. In fact, its a great way to drive up hardware costs and salaries.
I stand by my previous statement about stack ranking: It does not fucking work. EVER. Fire low performers if you must but don't turn them on each other.
Does this seem a surprising mis-step for a guy who has run multiple companies before, even succesful ones? Or I guess maybe this is actually pretty typical, you can't lay off that much of your company without making some big mistakes you try to reverse? (But still... this isn't Musk's first rodeo, right? Why does it seem like he doens't know what he's doing?)
It seems that this website asked me to accept cookies with a Pop up that covers the whole screen (mobile) after accepting (only apparently option) it was still behind a subscription.
Could HN parse links and put how many cookies each website is trying to force you to accept?
Apparently, I seem to be grossly out of touch with all this twitter-related drama. Can someone please explain why the events surrounding twitter acquisition are such a newsmaker?
What does it matter who owns the company and who the company fires? You can still (re)post the messages, you can still read the messages. All the favorite 'content-generators' are still there. Not much has changed from the users' perspective, everything works just fine.
I mean. A few memes - why not? A casual discussion - maybe. Rage and daily news titles about some internal decisions - what is this, '16 and pregnant'?
And what about this 'looking for twitter alternatives' crap? What for?
I feel like these low-effort topics pull the worst out of the community.
[+] [-] fm2606|3 years ago|reply
I understand I could be potentially hurting coworkers by adding additional work to their plate but Twitter didn't give 2 shits about the people left behind and the work that they would have to take on.
Why is it corporations can "layoff" without notice but as an employee you are expected to give 2 weeks notice? I guess one could argue that if the corp gives a severance pay then that makes up for sudden layoff. But it doesn't. Even if I have a savings for emergencies employee sponsored health insurance will eventually end. Then COBRA kicks in and there goes your emergency savings if you have a family.
Of course the whole U.S. health insurance shit-show is for another discussion but when you have a family AND a serious health issues, health insurance is front and center on one's mind.
If I never had to worry about health insurance and have the ability to go get the care I need/want would take a huge burden off of my shoulders and I'm sure I'm not alone.
Sorry for the rant.
[+] [-] boplicity|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] s1k3|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dragonwriter|3 years ago|reply
Since the workers mostly aren't actually fired, but in a no-access, no-duties period between notice and dismissal while still employed and on payroll, its “resume duties, quit, or be fired for cause”.
[+] [-] orev|3 years ago|reply
Both sides can equally give as much notice as they want. 2 weeks is only customary, but also seems to be rarely honored on both sides. If an employee gives 2 weeks, they’re often just walked out the door and stay on the payroll for 2 weeks (for any job more complex than menial tasks, no meaningful transition can be completed in 2 weeks, so it’s better to reduce any risks immediately). Companies often give severance packages longer than 2 weeks to avoid being sued, on condition of signing some paperwork to that effect.
[+] [-] dchftcs|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] fknorangesite|3 years ago|reply
Don't be. These are things worth ranting about; and even moreso they are things worth acting upon.
There are elections in the US this week, right?
[+] [-] unknown|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] gw98|3 years ago|reply
A company tried to get me to come back and do handover after terminating a contract in breach a few years back. Agreement was a month. I did nothing for the entire month because they didn’t specify a deliverable. Due to working through an agency that was larger than the company I got paid and they got told to piss off when they complained.
[+] [-] ianai|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thordenmark|3 years ago|reply
It definitely looks like Twitter was a hot mess and needed an amputation to save the patient.
[+] [-] gw98|3 years ago|reply
Swoop in to the sounds of Jan Hammer’s Crocketts Theme with his Tesla staff entourage, you’re fired you’re fired, sit down, hack the planet, job done, planet bows before him, free speech restored.
How it turned out:
“Um, boss, we’ve spent the last three days trying to get a build running in Jenkins. Might want to get the dudes you fired back.”. While all the advertisers distance themselves from the unravelling incel, racist, sexist shit show.
The guy’s a fucking idiot. Nothing else to it.
[+] [-] zzzeek|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] forgetfulness|3 years ago|reply
Are these the plays of a proverbial multi-dimensional chess genius that are beyond mortal ken, or one clumsy attempt after another to salvage a bad situation that he put himself in?
In some other HN thread related to this, people worked out the math behind the layoff of half of Twitter's workforce days into taking over: assuming revenue remained the same, the company would be profitable enough to cover the loans taken to purchase (with itself as collateral!)
[+] [-] electrondood|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] recuter|3 years ago|reply
There is a bunch of mass layoffs happening in other tech companies (and across the economy), are we going to pretend they will all go smoothly?
Actually come to think of it, without this acquisition Twitter would still have been forced to let a bunch of people go anyhow regardless of who happens to be the CEO. Possibly just as many. Probably with less severance... but definitely with nicer emails...
Take a deep breath.
[+] [-] qeternity|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] akira2501|3 years ago|reply
Meanwhile.. it's a corporation that trades in short messages between it's users. Is any of this really worth the emotional investment? It's an odd time in America, but casting all your hopes and dreams through the lens of what Elon Musk does today or where Twitter is tomorrow seems to me to be the worst way to approach it.
[+] [-] awinder|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gorbachev|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aksss|3 years ago|reply
Personally I can’t make myself see this as a humanitarian disaster — these employees have known the risk was on the horizon for many months, are eminently employable, high-functioning, with presumably good professional networks and resumes. They’ll land on their feet, and have themselves to blame if they didn’t prepare accordingly. Plenty of other drama in the world to worry about, much of it more severe than ex-twitter ee’s on the open job market thirsty for talent.
[+] [-] atarian|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] theonething|3 years ago|reply
https://world.hey.com/dhh/apple-fired-4-100-when-steve-jobs-...
[+] [-] ShredKazoo|3 years ago|reply
Additionally I think "verified users get priority in replies" has the potential to be absolutely killer. Everyone knows that clout chasing is huge on Twitter. I could easily see a spiral like so:
* Initially 5% of daily actives buy the check marks, mostly just to own the libs (Fox News loves Elon btw). But the newborn blue checks are everywhere in replies. They're accumulating followers like no tomorrow.
* Others begin to follow suit. $8/month is a small price to pay for clout. Remember, that's what they're all there for. "If anyone tells you they don't want more twitter followers, they're lying."
* 10% of the userbase has bought a blue check. 20%. The anti-Elon folks are holding out. But their voices are growing quieter and quieter.
* The entire tenor of the site begins to change. The loudest voices are the Elon fans who bought the check mark early. His politics become dominant on the site.
* Eventually the anti-Elon folks either ragequit or end up purchasing the checkmark. Petty tyranny and clout chasing are kind of their thing. It's a case of irresistible force meets immovable object. Endgame seems hard to predict.
[+] [-] BrentOzar|3 years ago|reply
If you’re reading this, and Twitter wants you back, I hope you ask for a contract with a year’s pay in advance, due before returning to work, at 10x your prior rate.
After all, you must be one of those 10x developers if Elon is willing to eat crow and ask you to come back.
[+] [-] forgetfulness|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] akmarinov|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] onion2k|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jmclnx|3 years ago|reply
Mang. did not keep count, some Departments were emptied out. So after a couple of weeks, many people were re-hired and was able to keep their '1 year salary bonus'.
Many people in IT left once the re-hirings happened. The company went chapter 11 about 5 years later.
[+] [-] pella|3 years ago|reply
see the top comments.
"Allegedly Oracle did this years ago when they had layoffs-- employees were let go, then asked if they wanted to return. Apparently, if they said no, the company considered the exit a resignation instead of a layoff, and would refuse severance. If oracle was then taken to court over the lack of severance by former employees, those employees' refusal to rejoin the company could be used to avoid an unfavorable ruling for Oracle."
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33488447
[+] [-] notacoward|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] byyll|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] davesque|3 years ago|reply
Turns out running a large technology platform takes more than just wishful thinking and personal brand stunts.
[+] [-] hagbarth|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pinewurst|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MangoCoffee|3 years ago|reply
https://archive.ph/VLCqz
[+] [-] thrillgore|3 years ago|reply
You cannot audit performance at a software company by SLOC. In fact, its a great way to drive up hardware costs and salaries.
I stand by my previous statement about stack ranking: It does not fucking work. EVER. Fire low performers if you must but don't turn them on each other.
[+] [-] jrochkind1|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cbtacy|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] atum47|3 years ago|reply
Could HN parse links and put how many cookies each website is trying to force you to accept?
[+] [-] brigandish|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] n4bz0r|3 years ago|reply
What does it matter who owns the company and who the company fires? You can still (re)post the messages, you can still read the messages. All the favorite 'content-generators' are still there. Not much has changed from the users' perspective, everything works just fine.
I mean. A few memes - why not? A casual discussion - maybe. Rage and daily news titles about some internal decisions - what is this, '16 and pregnant'?
And what about this 'looking for twitter alternatives' crap? What for?
I feel like these low-effort topics pull the worst out of the community.
[+] [-] palata|3 years ago|reply
Well every opportunity is good to try to promote your network, isn't it?
[+] [-] shrubble|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] luxcem|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rdtwo|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dirkg|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwawayhaxor|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ProjectArcturis|3 years ago|reply