[disruptiveink]

Pretty sure layoffs decrease productivity of the remaining employees, unless you're a H-1B visa worker, no one "works harder" after layoffs. Morale is low, resentment over "now I have to do X as well" grows and productivity gets hit.

[nsxwolf]

I don't stay after a big round of layoffs for the same reason I'd rather buy stocks when they look like they're going up, not down.

The company is signaling that it is not doing well - why shouldn't I leave for a company that is doing well?

The only way I'll stay is if you want me to be part of a real plan to turn things around. And my involvement in that has to be rewarded - not just at the successful end of that process, but immediately.

[myth_drannon]

The thing is there is no important signal about a specific company here, everyone is doing layoffs, the same as in previous years that everyone was in a hiring spree ignoring the actual company fundamentals. You can't just leave a company which is laying off people because everyone around you is also doing layoffs!

[type-r]

Nearly all major tech companies have announced layoffs in the last few months. Which companies would you say are "doing well" right now?

[pm90]

I’m assuming that with the major tech companies all laying off it becomes difficult to find another gig.

[nsxwolf]

I'm hoping I don't have to find that out any time soon, but I prefer staying in the space of unknown enterprisey, line-of-business backend orgs. FAANG/MAANG and adjacents seem to be allergic to these roles and I never see their resumes.

[nibbleshifter]

Mid size companies in the b2b space are still hiring. Companies that consumers will never have heard of.

[nytesky]

Are they paying FAANG salaries at $300k+?

[nsxwolf]

No, which is why I'm not yet too worried about them flooding the space and taking all the jobs away. I've never seen it happen before.

[phamilton4]

This is my main point from personal experience. I worked at a company that had almost yearly layoffs (caused by a late transition to the online world and competition). I knew whole teams that were reduced to a single person. Now that person has to do support 24x7, new feature requests, general information requests etc. Thank god I did not have to deal with that. Also it's very difficult to hire when people know the company is/has been doing layoffs.

[anon84873628]

I always assumed the rationale was this:

That employee now doing extra work accepts it because they are either scared of being laid off themselves, know they can't find a better job elsewhere, have irrational loyalty to the company, whatever. In any case the company benefits by exploiting the person.

If instead the person leaves, then the process fails and the issue rolls up the org hierarchy. Now the leadership evaluates if this process was actually necessary anyway. If not, let it die or let the shit roll downhill elsewhere. If it was important, invest in the refactor that everyone knew was probably necessary anyway.

For corporate leadership it's an easy way to either squeeze more out of the peasants, or force a reevaluation of priorities.