I understand it makes sense financially and that once companies become that big they are essentially playing two game (what they do game, with the workers, and what they're worth game, with the investors), but this really doesn't help with the dissociation more and more people are feeling between the stock market / modern management of companies by mba on one side, and their "real" every day live on the other.
I'm very lucky to be well off enough to not have to worry about things like that anymore, but I can't imagine the rage you must feel when fired not because you made a mistake, or are bad, or your project failed, or your division is doing poorly, or your company is, but because someone decided the employee ticker must reach that number, and now if it's not done the market will decide it's a failure, so you won the inverse lottery.
Because it's an external estimate. From the article:
"That number has been guesstimated at around ten percent of the workforce – about 12,500 people – as part of an effort to get the overall workforce from 120,000 to below 100,000."
>while not even linking it to specific division within
there's no indication that they decided to cut 10% (or whatever) evenly across all divisions. The only thing we do know is that the overall reduction is 10%.
The important difference you're missing is that unlike china or the USSR, there are competitors you can jump ship to (eg. Lenovo or HP), and Dell can't send you to the gulag for disagreeing with them.
"The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or the “Board”) held in a February 2023 decision, McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB 58 (2023), that the “mere proffer” of a severance agreement which conditions receipt of benefits upon forfeiture of protected rights under the NLRA constitutes an unfair labor practice."
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/labor_law/publications/la...
US corps look more like feudal kingdoms of the middle ages with serfs.
Reddit is far worse than HN, and no one has time to correct all the anarchist teens.