[kag0]

Losing your job is a big deal to the average person, but a salary cut is immaterial to a big tech executive. An executive salary cut would save hundreds of jobs. People are laid off because the company is trying to spend less. There are multiple people in the same role and the headcount can be decreased to decrease spend on overall salary without decreasing the salary of individuals. But just because there is only one person in each executive role does not mean that money can't be saved on executive salaries.

[jayd16]

This is a misdirection. CEO salaries can be set to zero for all I care. I just think the idea that reducing headcount is not a legitimate strategy seems naive to me.

[simplotek]

> I just think the idea that reducing headcount is not a legitimate strategy seems naive to me.

This reads like a disingenuous attempt at a strawman.

It's immaterial if firing people is a legitimate strategy or not. The whole point is that executives get little to no repercussion for dictating layoffs, regardless of the company's health.

They wake up one day, can decide to fire 10k people, order HR to prune the loose ends to meet the target, tell the assistant to write a heart-felt "I take full responsibility" email, and get back to browse the web or sip lattes or go for a nice walk like nothing happened. In the end they can even get a raise out of it.

Meanwhile, 10k workers are screwed.

The incentives are all wrong.