[coldtea]

Yes, it's the employees fault. They were "asking for it", dressing their LinkedIn profile too provocatively /s

Employees in tech wanted, and were fine with, and even cherished "a sustainable and resilient business". That's the golden age IBM, Intel, AT&T, and so on employee for example.

Then companies started being about the stock market, and short term profit, throwing them under the bus whenever they had a chance, while still paying nice bonuses to the C-level and middle managers even when they run the companies to the ground.

So, yes, they felt little loyalty not to "jump ship" to a company didn't give a shit abotu them. Hell, the C-level execs that are paid 10-100x better than the employees would not think twice to jump ship at any chance they got, and somehow the employees are at fault for doing the same?

[rodgerd]

> Yes, it's the employees fault.

I mean I half agree. There's been factions in side the tech industry for years trying to get people to think about what would happen in this sort of scenario, to understand that "tech workers" have more in common with working-class factory workers in the 50s and 60s that with Peter Thiel and Sam Altman. That faction has pointed how IBM or HP acted when they were on a downward slope. To think about collective action, solidarity, other measures that might help ensure that good jobs don't become bad jobs become no jobs to further enrich a handful of factory owners.

But the braying voices places like here have always shouted those down. Always.