Hacker News Reader

People don't like to admit it, and companies will never say it, but a lot of recent "layoffs" have been polite ways to get rid of low performers. It's not a surprise that after dropping some dead weight companies want to bring in some new people. It's just that they can't come out and say it like that.

View on HN

Could be, it could also be that they tanked morale with massive layoffs and now they want to make it look like everything is good and they’re back on the growth train.

When a company has to cut a specific percentage, it’s impossible not to cut good people alongside low performers. The other problem with the “low performers” theory is that it assumes a competent management layer and ELT. How often has upper management made it harder for you to do your job because of poor communication, resource management, etc.?

Being a poor performer is not the same as being a bad person . There are lots of reasons for poor performance like you say that are probably all present to some extent or another. But from a company's perspective, it's better to keep people who are doing well under their circumstances and drop those that aren't. It is also better for the employee not to be in a bad situation where they can't perform well. Probably most of us have been there. None of that is a judgement about a person's objective worth.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com