Completely obliviating the "human" part of what an employee is, reducing it down to a mere number on a balance sheet, will never sit right with me. In the end, what those companies are ultimately taking a risk on is people's livelihoods.
Same as some high tech banking positions, you accept morally dubious work and get compensated adequately. I dont see people here complaining when ie Goldman Sachs fires 10% of the workforce either, rather some childish schadenfreude is not uncommon.
Look at it this way - maybe those brilliant people will grok the life lesson and tune down their greed a bit and try to make the world a bit better place instead. Or go on. In any case, hardly something to get agitated about (unless folks write about themselves but then all above still stands)
Used to be called "Personnel" - dry but definitely about human beings. Now it is "Human Resources" with the emphasis on the faceless resources part.
0. Assuming for a moment yhat such a thing exists.
Eventually we got a president who fired every air traffic controller in the country instead of trying to make a literal safety critical job reasonable and well compensated, and a huge amount of people lauded him for his anti-worker action.
Meanwhile "liberal" groups basically did coke and nothing else for several decades, losing any support they ever had with a lot of working class people.
So yeah. We have an entire generation of management that knows nothing more than quarterly profits, stock buy backs, and executive bonuses to the point that the rewards from a doubling in American productivity all went to about 100 people at the top of the food chain, and they bought all the newspapers and convinced half the nation that thinking this is wrong is treason and socialism.
This was their actions after they failed to overthrow FDR in the business plot. They wanted fascism in the 30s.
Do you have other sources that support this assertion about the 30s?