Comment by TangoTrotFox | Hacker News Reader

Comment by TangoTrotFox | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

The article's headline and its content paint different pictures, with the title really just being clickbait. They're not laying off individuals but paying them to leave including upwards of a year of salary, a bonus, and maintaining benefits. And it was voluntary -- not 'pink slipping.'

I don't really think you can attribute this to the tax breaks, but if you can - then this would be an immense positive. Employee turnover is already very high pretty much everywhere now a days. Getting paid a year of salary, and more, to agree to leave? That's something I think the vast majority of workers would be absolutely thrilled to be offered. It's a potentially life changing offer giving somebody a chance to carry out any entrepreneurial fantasy they have, to get a fat head start on the joy of compound interest, or simply spending a year with bikinis, booze, and beaches if that's your thing.

If they don’t get enough employees to voluntarily leave, you can be sure that there will be forced layoffs (with probably worse terms).

Imagine you’re a 50 year old employee with a kid in college. Would you be thrilled to accept a year of salary with limited job prospects? What jobs do you think will be the first to be cut?

Don’t try to sugar coat it - when there are lay-offs (voluntarily or not), it’s rarely a positive for the majority of affected employees. And this in no way should be considered a positive effect of the corporate tax cuts.

Here's a more reasonable question. If you ask 10,000 random workers from various tech companies if they'd be willing to leave in exchange for more than a year of salary, + benefits, + a bonus. What percent would say yes? We can only imagine, but it's going to be huge.

If you don't want to leave, don't apply. And on that note - yeah people did have to apply, and some were rejected.

You’re presuming that those workers have good prospects for finding a new job as good as the one they currently have. This is harder when you are older.

It’s either take the money now, or if they don’t get enough takers be laid off without as much if any incentive later on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com