[foofie]

> This basically sends the message "doesn't matter how good you are, we're going to spin the wheel every so often and if it lands on you you're out"

The conspiracy theory that's making the rounds is that these rounds of layoffs from tech firms have zero to do with financial reports or economy downturns, and are instead a coordinated effort, along with RTO policies, to wrestle negotiation power from tech workers and put downward pressure on tech salaries. Hence the apparent lack of criteria and indiscriminate layoffs complemented with hiring rounds.

I recall that a FANG ordered managers to decimate their teams while ramping up hiring on teams located in the same building, and HR openly rejected the idea of even having employees in the chopping block interview for those positions.

[bsimpson]

I've also heard it positioned as an age discrimination loophole to fire your seniors and replace them with juniors, while calling the whole thing a macroeconomic-driven layoff.

[datacruncher01]

I'd say the simpler answer is likely the right one. Rates being higher means it's more expensive for the business to maintain it's cash flow. Shouldn't be an issue for a company like Google but here's the rub, an exec at one public company sees a peer at another (that's probably doing worse financially) drop headcount and a rise in stock, if that exec doesn't do the same they get perceived as not doing enough and see a dip in stock. So they drop headcount too.

While it sucks for those who get the boot, this has the benefit of raising salaries overall. Because the company that does this usually cuts too much and has to later rehire at market rates which rise over time.

[darreninthenet]

Is there no law in the US that requires an employer to find a job for somebody before firing? And that includes being allowed to apply for open roles...

[lotsofpulp]

Barring an agreement to the contrary, employers and employees can terminate employment any time they want, except in Montana, as long as the termination is not due to the employee being in a protected class.

[darreninthenet]

So apart from the protected class thing, there's no concept of wrongful dismissal in the US?

And what's different in Montana?

[lotsofpulp]

Montana has a state law requiring “good cause”:

https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0390/chapter_0020/part_00...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment

[johnnyanmac]

Nope, not unless you're let go due to slander/libel. Even then I'm not sure if that means you guarantee your job back.

Some states have stronger protections in terms of how much warning an employee gets or severerance. But it's not widespread.