LinkedIn lays off 668 employees only five months after cutting 700 jobs

Jcmg62

Member
Oct 8, 2013
760
9
18
Visit site
1400 people unemployed. Homes lost, savings wiped out, dreams dashed... But hey, at least the company is doing well.

There was a time when companies didn't make redundancies when they were profitable. Redundancy and retrenchment were tools used by HR when times were bad and profits were sliding.

Neither of those things are happening at Microsoft. They're posting record profits.

They're quite literally destroying people's lives to boost their already enormous profits.

PLC's and global empires have a certain amount of social responsibility, whether they like it or not. They're expected to create jobs and spread wealth.

Man, I'm so done with the greed of big tech. I honestly hope the EU rips their heart and lungs out.
 

Village_Idiot

New member
Oct 9, 2023
16
4
3
Visit site
1400 people unemployed. Homes lost, savings wiped out, dreams dashed... But hey, at least the company is doing well.

There was a time when companies didn't make redundancies when they were profitable. Redundancy and retrenchment were tools used by HR when times were bad and profits were sliding.

Neither of those things are happening at Microsoft. They're posting record profits.

They're quite literally destroying people's lives to boost their already enormous profits.

PLC's and global empires have a certain amount of social responsibility, whether they like it or not. They're expected to create jobs and spread wealth.

Man, I'm so done with the greed of big tech. I honestly hope the EU rips their heart and lungs out.
Out of around 221,000 total employees? I suppose Microsoft could just keep eating costs until it goes out business. Then around 220,000 people would be out of jobs.

1,400 is a drop in the bucket. Easily absorbed into other tech companies.
 

Jcmg62

Member
Oct 8, 2013
760
9
18
Visit site
Out of around 221,000 total employees? I suppose Microsoft could just keep eating costs until it goes out business. Then around 220,000 people would be out of jobs.

1,400 is a drop in the bucket. Easily absorbed into other tech companies.
Its not eating costs. It's making billions and billion every quarter. That's the point I was making.

If Microsoft was losing money or struggling, I'd get the need to cut jobs to save the company, but that's not the case. It's a trillion dollar business that makes more in profit than the entire GDP of a small country.
 

Iamdumbguy

Member
Jun 30, 2023
120
17
18
Visit site
1400 people unemployed. Homes lost, savings wiped out, dreams dashed... But hey, at least the company is doing well.

There was a time when companies didn't make redundancies when they were profitable. Redundancy and retrenchment were tools used by HR when times were bad and profits were sliding.

Neither of those things are happening at Microsoft. They're posting record profits.

They're quite literally destroying people's lives to boost their already enormous profits.

PLC's and global empires have a certain amount of social responsibility, whether they like it or not. They're expected to create jobs and spread wealth.

Man, I'm so done with the greed of big tech. I honestly hope the EU rips their heart and lungs out.
It's a great sign that when a company is doing well, that's the time to put the hurt on the workforce. The University of Chicago is truly one of the evilest places on earth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HelloNNNewman

Village_Idiot

New member
Oct 9, 2023
16
4
3
Visit site
Its not eating costs. It's making billions and billion every quarter. That's the point I was making.

If Microsoft was losing money or struggling, I'd get the need to cut jobs to save the company, but that's not the case. It's a trillion dollar business that makes more in profit than the entire GDP of a small country.
Actually, by keeping those 1400 people it is eating costs. Sticking to inefficient processes or keeping unproductive workers on the payroll is eating costs; it eats into LinkedIn's budget. LinkedIn doesn't have an unlimited budget; 1,400 people at an average salary of $65,000/year is $91,000,000 a year. That's $91 million that can be put back into LinkedIn's budget to develop new processes and streamline and improve others. It also frees up funds to recruit and hire new employees with the skill sets it needs and train others. Businesses have to adapt and introduce new processes and streamline current ones if they want to stay in business. That's not free, and it can cost a lot of money. It's Business 101 and that's how businesses have been working for thousands of years.

That is part of life. Get over it.
 
Last edited:

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
323,852
Messages
2,244,514
Members
428,134
Latest member
cara.di