[jason_slack]

I'm not sure that is fair to say. I think all companies will go through a "fat trimming" period. Yahoo grew big and didn't/doesn't have the business model to sustain that growth.

Side Note: I am actually confused about what Yahoo's market is now-a-days.

[stevo111]

>fat trimming

and if that's the case - that's exactly what you say instead of - "these are bad devs and we don't need them". Hey person with family and kids - screw you - good luck finding a job after Yahoo CEO declared you an unworthy asset.

[humbledrone]

> Hey person with family and kids - screw you - good luck finding a job after Yahoo CEO declared you an unworthy asset.

What would you rather have happen: (a) a company fires their under-performing employees and maybe becomes successful or (b) a company keeps these employees around forever and ends up failing, putting everyone who works there out of a job (instead of just the under-performers)?

Obviously the people being fired should be treated with respect, and I'd hope they will get a fair severance package, etc. But business is business, and keeping around employees who are dragging the company down isn't good for anyone in the long term.

(I have no stake in Yahoo, and know little about their layoffs. I just don't understand your argument.)