This is false in a broad sense - the majority of CEOs plan to increase headcount this year in spite of layoffs. You can find examples here and there where it is true, but in general it is not. There's tons of literature of this readily available, but here is an example from as recently as yesterday: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ceo-outlook-report-optimism-r...
> None of these layoffs are focused on laying off their most expensive people.
The people you see laid off tend to be newly hired at higher recent market rates or people who have been there a very long time, both of whom are either expensive in a relative sense or an absolute one.
But even that is besides the point. Even if you fire randomly you still see this benefit if you're a CEO.
This just means that companies are continuing to hirer. It doesn't mean that they plan on increasing headcount to above where it was before the layoff.
If you're continuing to hire past these layoffs, and expanding plans to do so, it's to take advantage of the environment created by the layoffs. If there really was a fiscal crisis you'd also see mass hiring freezes, but we're not seeing that.
> “We expect to end 2023 as either roughly the same size or even a slightly smaller organization than we are today,” said Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/41-of-companies-pla...
I like my CEO, but it doesn't bother me if he doesn't know about me. He has much more important stuff to think about.
>without getting paid for it.
I don't care about money. I join companies to have fun working on their projects.
>you'd also see mass hiring freezes
Hiring has slowed down. Large companies are always going to want new people.
>“We expect to end 2023 as either roughly the same size or even a slightly smaller organization than we are today,” said Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
Meta's employee count has typically grown over 20% every year. This was also said before the layoffs were public knowledge.