follow up question,
why hasn't apple needed to do this? how are they keeping 'tabs' on 'worker power'?
why hasn't apple needed to do this? how are they keeping 'tabs' on 'worker power'?
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/18/apple-had-slower-headcount-g...
why haven't the usual ways been sufficient for the rest of the tech companies?
why are the usual ways still sufficient for apple but not for the others???
Other companies try to mealy-mouth their way around the facts of life, most of the time, because they have an "evil" image so wouldn't be able to recruit otherwise.
how is restricting the creation of chatrooms in a communication tool that's likely provided by the company in any way comparable to any of your other examples? If Slack is provided by your company, they would likely have mean to get everything you might have written there, that's already an incentive to move any discussion the company might frown on (like talk of unionizing efforts) on another platform that's not controlled by them.
Workers at work should have the ability to discuss their jobs with each other.
edit: I don't know if I made this clear enough, but you cant just tell people at your job to go to a website if you only see two or three of them at a time, and since your employer has invented a new policy against "handing out political literature" you can't even print business cards with the website on them and hand them to people without risking termination for cause.
> Workers at work should have the ability to discuss their jobs with each other.
yes. But that's not necessarily the obligation of the company to provide them a tool to do so, hence my comment about using another platform
Cheap money had to be spent in an inflationary economy, money is more expensive now with higher rates and thus companies that ramped up spending too fast need to cut costs.
Apple did not hire as many people during the pandemic so they don't have as much pressure.
I also don't understand the notion of "overhiring". Tech doesn't just hire people without having anything lined up for them to do. At least not en masse.
Yet? There's still a lot of market uncertainty.
The reason Apple didn't do a mass layoff is because they didn't overhire during 2021/2022.
Like most articles from the LA Times, this seems like complete BS as usual.
It's where the evil corporation narrative falls down, apple makes sure they hire the right people and then keep them. It's the way it should be.
But even for other tech companies, people on HN need to look outside of tech and see what life is like, there are people on here who literally had the best possible jobs in the entire history of humanity, with prepaid 3 meals a day, free daycare, free gym, free everything, yet somehow think that these companies were evil exploitative capitalists.
I'm sorry - no. These were the best employers in the world. Now there's a serious downturn in the economy, they are firing like 5-10% of staff. That's nothing. Try being a factory worker at a Tyson food factory in the midwest, or a foxconn factory in china, then you'll understood how good these tech companies treat their employees.
This is like complaining about some athlete getting paid millions to risk their health for entertainment, while not once giving a thought about the billionaire that pays them.
No one is buying a ticket to watch Jerry Jones sit up in a skybox. Similarly, no one buys a piece of software or a chicken breast because of some exec cruising away on inertia.