Google lays off 100 at YouTube; CEO says more layoffs are coming::undefined
You must log in or register to comment.
When I was in college, working for Google was a dream job for a lot of my friends. I have to think that hiring from that position is awesome — lots of really smart, motivated, enthusiastic grads, and you get to pick the best. I wonder if all that has changed?
Old article, and yes, “corporations are not friends” yada yada: https://www.businessinsider.com/tech-companines-that-havent-had-layoffs-job-cuts-yet-2023-1
If I’m ever in the market for another job and have the luxury of choice, the layoff question will be pretty high up.
They’ll never really answer the layoff question. Probably best to simply stay away from corporations that chronically overhire and go through regular layoff cycles.
Nah, they’ll answer it, but the person answering it isn’t in control of it, and things change on a whim.
Source: I did ask, and I was laid off.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Today’s Google layoff announcement concerns YouTube, which plans to lay off 100 employees.
The Verge got hold of an internal memo from Pichai to Google’s remaining employees on January 10, telling them to brace for “tough choices” in the future and that “to be upfront, some teams will continue to make specific resource allocation decisions throughout the year where needed, and some roles may be impacted.”
Making investors happy is a big factor in all these layoffs, so if you’re interested in the Wall Street perspective on Google’s headcount, back in March 2023, activist investor Christopher Hohn of TCI Fund Management wanted to see Pichai cut another 25,000 people after the 12,000 original layoffs.
For years, one of Google’s big advantages was being a great workplace, with endless employee perks, 20 percent time to work on pet projects, and whimsical offices.
Budget cutbacks and another year of looming layoffs will put a serious dent in the already awful morale at the company.
Page and Brin are no longer in charge, though, and the company has changed significantly since then.
The original article contains 420 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 57%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Why in the world does an “activist investor” need to exist?
Investors asking for headcount reductions seems so slimey. Costs go down, short term profit margins increase, stock ticks up, rinse and repeat until the company is totally gutted and starts going under: sell stocks.
I’ve worked at companies who based their entire long-term strategy around appeasing investors, getting big exec bonus, and crapping all of their long-term revenue because they’re only goal is enriching themselves before bailing.
It’s like an infestation. There is virtually zero incentive for thinking about the future of a company beyond the stocks price for the next 5/10 years, and nothing is ever off the table to hit those targets.
