Ask HN: Why were you laid off ?
19 comments
I was laid off in December last year. Looking back, it was clear why, I was the youngest member of the team, had the least experience and was struggling to pick up the new tasks assigned to me with the limited knowledge I had about the product and its underlying tech. I don't think my performance was judged too harshly or it was a major contributor, rather my superior had to make a layoff happen in the team, and I was the one with the least time in the company and least proven experience.
Different recession. Spring of 2008 I was in a corporate job within a fairly new business unit. Over the space of 3 years we had grown the new business unit from nothing to a unit with about 25 employees and turning a profit. For the first few months our business unit wasn't touched. We saw other more mature business units in the corporation going through selective layoffs to tighten up expenses. But when the recession started impacting our revenue growth, from a 50 to 60% annual growth down to 5% growth the layoffs came to our unit.
What I provided to the business was one of the ancillary services rather than the core service offering. So regardless of the good performance reviews when the word came down that our unit needed to cut costs the only place to cut was labor and I and a couple other people got laid off in the first round. In many ways I couldn't fault the decision.
Oddly enough they laid off the sales person who was most responsible for their growth. He had the misfortune of having been given the challenge of opening up a new market just as the first of the recession was being felt in 2007. Honestly I was more surprised at his layoff than my own. But I guess whoever was higher up in the corporation directing our layoffs was more focused on what have you done for us in the past 3 to 6 months than what have you done for us in the past 3 to 4 years.
What I provided to the business was one of the ancillary services rather than the core service offering. So regardless of the good performance reviews when the word came down that our unit needed to cut costs the only place to cut was labor and I and a couple other people got laid off in the first round. In many ways I couldn't fault the decision.
Oddly enough they laid off the sales person who was most responsible for their growth. He had the misfortune of having been given the challenge of opening up a new market just as the first of the recession was being felt in 2007. Honestly I was more surprised at his layoff than my own. But I guess whoever was higher up in the corporation directing our layoffs was more focused on what have you done for us in the past 3 to 6 months than what have you done for us in the past 3 to 4 years.
Twice in the comments you said you wanted to discuss "neopotism" (I'm assuming you mean nepotism). Yet you didn't say that in the main question for some reason. Nepotism wouldn't be a cause of layoffs but a situation where someone was kept on despite poor performance, due to their connections (family).
Over 30 years, I've certainly seen this happen. Usually more about friendships and professional connections than family. But how a person interacts with their co-workers in and out of office hours certainly impacts their standing and their likelihood of staying at a company during a period of layoffs. Those factors are usually far more important than actual performance.
Any supervisor can manipulate the facts of a person's overall performance to seem more or less favorable in order to drive that person out or keep them. Most jobs are not strictly 100% measurable performance numbers to act on (of course there are some).
I'd say that nepotism is almost not worth considering with respect to layoffs. Do your best work. Interact as best you can with your co-workers. Control the things you can control. If nepotism is an issue, that's something specific to the circumstances or company and not likely something you can influence, so if it is a bother, move on.
Over 30 years, I've certainly seen this happen. Usually more about friendships and professional connections than family. But how a person interacts with their co-workers in and out of office hours certainly impacts their standing and their likelihood of staying at a company during a period of layoffs. Those factors are usually far more important than actual performance.
Any supervisor can manipulate the facts of a person's overall performance to seem more or less favorable in order to drive that person out or keep them. Most jobs are not strictly 100% measurable performance numbers to act on (of course there are some).
I'd say that nepotism is almost not worth considering with respect to layoffs. Do your best work. Interact as best you can with your co-workers. Control the things you can control. If nepotism is an issue, that's something specific to the circumstances or company and not likely something you can influence, so if it is a bother, move on.
People are let go through a mixture of rank & stack, how good you are at your job, your reputation, who you know, what you know, amongst others. There's no single formula that will allow you to keep a job in all settings. To survive then you need to get into a position of being somebody who delivers, is trustworthy, is well-known, isn't an agitator, knows a lot. Basically the list of all things that could get you RIF'd.
A lot of people are being let go because they’re not very good at their jobs.
A lot of people are being let go because they’re great at their jobs but their employers have no idea what they do.
A lot of people are being laid off because employers are trying to preserve profits at a time they’re worried that demand will be cratering.
A lot of… you get the idea the list of reasons is infinite
A lot of people are being let go because they’re great at their jobs but their employers have no idea what they do.
A lot of people are being laid off because employers are trying to preserve profits at a time they’re worried that demand will be cratering.
A lot of… you get the idea the list of reasons is infinite
How good you are at your job is by far the smallest factor out of the 3 you listed.
A lot of people I saw being let go at my company weren't very good at their jobs - either because they were not capable or because they were not willing to do a lot of work - and leadership took the opportunity, in their eyes, to get rid of them. I'm not saying it was the biggest factor, but I wouldn't say it was "by far the smallest" based on my observations.
Agreed. I saw lots of really really questionable people not get laid off. It seemed to depend much more on business unit than job performance. Though once you are already in a business unit that is being cut, maybe it is performance related, not sure.
This exactly
I want to discuss this issue:
Neopotism
I always think "the number of reasons is infinite" is very snarky. I think he probably wants to extract some stats out of the answers. Maybe some reasons are more common than others. It's not a bad question.
I want to discuss the issue of neopotism in layoffs.
Then why didn't you start with that in your post?
If it's a layoff the most likely cause is that you (or your whole team) weren't part of current management attention points.
I mean a layoff is like being re-orged outside of the company. The question is sort-of equivalent to "how do I make sure I get a better position in a reorg, rather than a worse one".
It has nothing to do with your performance per se, the only thing about your performance that matters is that whether you're necessary to "keep the lights on" (AND that people know that. Otherwise you get the twitter "you're laid off" ... "PLEASE COME BACK NOW" Twitter fiasco type situation). Otherwise, you could have stellar performance, great reputation, long service to the company, ... and it wouldn't matter.
I mean a layoff is like being re-orged outside of the company. The question is sort-of equivalent to "how do I make sure I get a better position in a reorg, rather than a worse one".
It has nothing to do with your performance per se, the only thing about your performance that matters is that whether you're necessary to "keep the lights on" (AND that people know that. Otherwise you get the twitter "you're laid off" ... "PLEASE COME BACK NOW" Twitter fiasco type situation). Otherwise, you could have stellar performance, great reputation, long service to the company, ... and it wouldn't matter.
It's not clear to me what the context is. Why do you want to know?
You are asking for a lot.
I was laid off from a small SaaS company. Didn’t seem performance based though. I imagine it was mostly due to the over hiring in 2020 and 2021. Pretty much everyone laid off was hired in the prior year, across every part of the company. Only person who didn’t get axed was my manager, who was told he’d have to do the work of all us developers.
The given reason was that their new product didn’t see the level of adoption they wanted, and in my personal experience that also makes sense.
The given reason was that their new product didn’t see the level of adoption they wanted, and in my personal experience that also makes sense.
But how would these people know? The correct question would be: if you were told to fire people, what guidelines did you receive from your boss?
The overarching reason seems to be capital owners squeezing costs to bump short-term profits and/or head off cost inflation.
is this a job interview
Can you just ask chatGPT for that?
2. How do you believe your performance was evaluated by your superiors before you were let go?
3. What steps have you taken to address any potential concerns that may have led to your dismissal?
4. Can you discuss any experiences you've had with workplace politics and how you navigated them?
5. In your opinion, what are some of the most important qualities for success in a professional setting?