Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20%

Re:Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20% by derefr on Thursday November 02, 2017 @04:34PM (#15614041)

"Layoff" and "firing" are separate concepts here. The central example of a true layoff is a trade work shortage: the layoff happens with very little notice, because it reflects the volatile nature of the demand for the trade. If there's suddenly, unexpectedly nothing for anyone to do, then there's suddenly, unexpectedly no benefit in paying anyone to come in for the day to do it.

Does that kind of situation still confer protections in Germany? If so, how do German manufacturing companies manage to not go bankrupt? Do all the companies subscribe to huge insurance pools?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20% by danbruc on Thursday November 02, 2017 @04:47PM (#15614149)

As far as I know the barriers are even higher for layoffs. You can not, for example, arbitrarily pick which workers to layoff but have to minimize the social impact when you have to choose between several employees doing the same work, for example take age, spousal support, and things like that into consideration. But I am totally not an expert and I am sure it is a vastly more complex topic than I can imagine.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20% by pc86 on Friday November 03, 2017 @09:36AM (#15619076)

This seems backwards to me. Because my spouse has a better job than Mike's, I'm more likely to get laid off? Because I'm younger than Bill and can theoretically make up the financial impact sooner I'm more likely to get laid off?

If there are ten employees you need to cut, shouldn't they be cut based on either their recent performance, or a completely random method?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20% by gaius on Friday November 03, 2017 @02:54PM (#15621457)

If there are ten employees you need to cut, shouldn't they be cut based on either their recent performance

No, because layoffs are position-based. If it's a performance related cull then that's not the same as redundancies. If you want to get rid of people like that then you need ironclad documentation and/or to provide generous packages.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20% by pas on Friday November 03, 2017 @12:42PM (#15620478)

In a hard time it tries to do the thing with the less overall impact.

Maybe it's putting lipstick on a pig, maybe it's fairness.

Layoffs (mass dismissal) are very hard, because usually it means the whole region has economic problems, and those that get laid off are especially vulnerable - because they almost by definition work in a sort of dying industry/trade.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20% by fjsolwmv on Friday November 03, 2017 @11:33AM (#15619936)

Welcome to the world of progressive taxation. The more secure you are, the more you pay.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20% by pjc50 on Friday November 03, 2017 @06:24AM (#15618010)

.. but there isn't suddenly, unexpectly, no need for the employees to pay their rent, mortgages and bills.

When I was made redundant a decade ago in the UK I got:

- week's "consultation period" during which the ranking process for who would be made redundant was explained

- pay in lieu of month's notice

- (optional on behalf of the employer) three month's pay for signing away my right to sue for wrongful dismissal

The only situation in which employees can really lose out is if the company goes bankrupt in which case they are at risk of losing their last paycheque.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20% by Xylakant on Thursday November 02, 2017 @05:08PM (#15614308)

Traditionally, large scale layoffs are hard and avoided, especially in industries where unions are strong. If required they are usually negotiated with the union. Still, there are often ways to avoid a layoff. The union sometimes agrees on a temporary pay cut across the board. There are some legal instruments that help a company in a crisis, Kurzarbeit is one of the most german one: The company can under some circumstances cut work time (and salaries) for a specified group of employees and the state will cover for a certain percentage of the wage loss. This allows the company to retain staff in an unexpected slow in business and be ready and fully staffed when orders start rolling in. In effect a giant insurance pool.

[ Parent | on HN ]