[thiscatis]

"An excuse to cut some projects that haven't panned out, dump a bunch of lower performers, and general other cleanup"

How is stopping bad projects, letting go non-performers and cleaning up an excuse and not just plain smart business?

People in this hackernews bubble are seriously disconnected from the real world.

[lupyro]

A layoff should be a last resort, sever the arm to save the body type situation.

When projects don't pan out you first try to reallocate those people to more profitable areas. Also use this time to reflect on why these project didn't pan out, learn from those who worked on it and try to avoid making the same mistake in the future.

With bad performers, you put them on a performance improvement plan (pip).

General other cleanup is vague, but in most cases there's a more pragmatic approach.

Again, sometimes things are so bad you have to resort to worse options. We're in a recession, stocks are going to dip, just focus on the fundamentals and it'll be over before you know it. Instead execs are burning their culture and moral for a temporary boost.

[l33t233372]

Grandparent post didn’t say letting go low performers was an excuse. The comment was saying that the current climate is giving them free reign to make the “plain smart business” move of firing those people without the typical negative reputation associated with mass performance based firings.

[cyanydeez]

Instead of a CEO saying "this project is a mistake, let's do something else". They say "we can't afford these people, oops, that project has to shut down".

So yeah, it's ass covering season for failed CEO iniatives.

[wombatpm]

How long were these bad projects allowed to fester? Why was nothing done sooner? Suddenly these CEOs wake up and decide now is the time panic?

[c0brac0bra]

On what basis would you conclude that "now" is not "soonest", other than conjecture?