← Back to context

Comment by mtndew4brkfst

8 months ago

That wasn't how I interpreted this phrasing. I read it as "it is worth being critical of an org that does mass layoffs and then goes on to hire new people to fill vacated roles shortly after the layoffs were finished".

That timing shows that it's not just implementing headcount and budget reductions, which are somewhat defensible if still tragic. It was instead a forced turnover, which in some cases can be a route to wage suppression.

>That timing shows that it's not just implementing headcount and budget reductions, which are somewhat defensible if still tragic. It was instead a forced turnover, which in some cases can be a route to wage suppression.

Apparently the person in question was fired within 3 months of being hired[1]. If this is true it seems like a stretch to characterize it as "forced turnover" or "wage suppression".

[1] https://x.com/eastdakota/status/1745697840180191501