857
submitted 9 months ago by lledrtx@lemmy.world to c/workreform@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 358 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Doesn't even question what employees are possibly doing. Just says there are too many and they must be put out on the street. Says the people who are left are making too much money.

I say this a lot but....seriously....when do we start burning things?

[-] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 158 points 9 months ago

Hedge fund. He doesn’t care about the employees or the company. Just the money he can make trading the stock.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 108 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

So an inhuman greed monster sociopath, then.

[-] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 26 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I don’t have a problem with people who create value and become wealthy. They earned it and created good jobs, more power to them.

Hedge funds, most Private equity, etc can go fuck themselves. They strip wealth and destroy things.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 58 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I'm not for people only interested in benefiting themselves being the ones rewarded most by society, let alone being the ones effectively in charge of society as they are.

It isn't heroic, benevolent, or even minimally pro-social to spend your life trying to accrue private profit for the sake of private profit. It just makes you greedy and selfish. Or as they call it with their orwellian language manipulation, "rational self-interest." being greedy, selfish, and unconcerned with the effects your actions have on others makes you a vile, broken, contemptible person, and humanity seems to have forgotten that entirely, or at least we've been propagandized to forget it by the owner class.

We punish people that dare to pursue vocations that benefit society, like teachers and paramedics, and reward selfishness.

I can't root for my own species in this state. Slitting eachother's throats when there's another dollar to be had by it. If this is truly what our species has chosen as it's most practiced purpose and meaning, I want no part of it, and I will be grateful when it's time to leave it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 26 points 9 months ago

No one creates wealth alone. When one becomes that rich, they've stolen it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] instamat@lemmy.world 26 points 9 months ago

Notice also how he starts each paragraph with “I” and not to be an armchair psychiatrist but that says a lot about his motivation.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 76 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

My hatred of the owner class is matched only by my disappointment in my fellow humans for not only taking it, but often defending it.

The people we struggle for have abandoned their humanity. That's what it takes to be one of society's supposed winners or be in their good graces: practiced sociopathy.

And half of the peasants fantasize about being the sociopaths instead of ending their reign and this despicable con game of an economy.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] lickmygiggle@lemmy.world 44 points 9 months ago

I’m genuinely not super revolutionary but I didn’t get halfway through this letter before coming to the realization that this person needed to not exist anymore and same for anybody else of the same ilk.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] paysrenttobirds@sh.itjust.works 30 points 9 months ago

He says they aren't needed "operationally" but Alphabet is not supposed to be merely operating anything. They are supposed to be inventing and experimenting and pushing the envelope. This discontented billionaire just wants ever-increasing rent on existing IP and should be called out as a simple landlord and not called an investor at all.

[-] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 21 points 9 months ago

Yeah, I'm not sure I really get this whole "reduce employment" logic. Like if some product just isn't profitable and you lay off the employees you hired to work on it, that's not surprising, but if the employees are doing something profitable, and you actually needed to hire that many to get whatever it was you hired them for done, shouldn't it be more profitable to a company to keep them, even if one had a large number?

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 34 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Moreover, if all the oligarchs are doing it, and they are, who will be left to buy their products/services?

They're breaking their own ponzi scheme economy for a few more quarterly profit boosts because there's nowhere else to grow/metastasize. Media companies are making less media. Food makers are making less product types. Their profit is coming out of gutting workers and their ability to produce what their economic sector produced in the first place.

This is a terminal stage market capitalism fire sale. The snake is eating its own tail having conquered the board.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 139 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Our civilization rewards behavior like this, while literally punishing pro-social behavior like teaching.

Think about what that says about humanity. Our values are wrong and our entire species strives to elevate practicing sociopaths.

[-] floofloof@lemmy.ca 25 points 9 months ago

Our values are wrong and our entire species strives to elevate practicing sociopaths.

Not our entire species. Only the fans of capitalism. Unfortunately a few of them are quite powerful.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 47 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Most of us without meaningful capital are either forced to do it in practice with our labor, or be cast out to serve the owners in another way: as capitalist scarecrows. Our homeless exist on purpose, it wouldn't be that expensive to provide minimal shelter. They exist to die slowly and publicly of exposure, and constant ~~police~~ capital defense force harassment, to terrify the capital batteries into continuing to show up to their jobs to produce value for their owners.

One way or another, those without capital are forced to serve the owners. Nothing "voluntary" about modern market capitalism, short of slitting one's own throat.

You will serve the owner's insatiable greed directly, or you will serve as an example and threat to the others.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] UNWILLING_PARTICIPANT@sh.itjust.works 108 points 9 months ago

The so-called "job creators," everyone

[-] Lennnny@lemmy.world 101 points 9 months ago

This guy needs to win an all expenses paid trip to view the Titanic.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 36 points 9 months ago

So I see you found the recipe for my 10 microsecond billionaire salsa!

[-] _number8_@lemmy.world 82 points 9 months ago

what a fucking absolute psychopath

please lay off 150000 thanks

[-] techt@lemmy.world 67 points 9 months ago

He's saying lay off to 150k, not by 150k. He says getting down to that would be a 20% reduction, so that puts the then-current headcount at ~188k, so get rid of about 35-40k people.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 33 points 9 months ago

So I can get some more zeroes on my balance sheet that I don't need and will never use. Cheerio!

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] slingstone@lemmy.world 62 points 9 months ago
[-] Gork@lemm.ee 61 points 9 months ago

Can we, you know, eat this guy right now?

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 56 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I read his wikipedia article and I must say I was somewhat confused. He does not eat meat, he advocates urgent action on the climate crisis and has given over billions to children's investment f (don't know if this is a good charity or not). And yet he is an asshole enough to ask a company to fire tens of thousands of employees so his investments are more profitable on short term. It is entirely possible that he does not eat meat because he thinks that it is healthier and would make him live longer (typical billionaire). Moreover he was directly affiliated to the mentioned children's charity through his wife so god knows what is really going on in there. Also after their divorce his fund is no longer contractually tied to the foundation so don't know if he is regularly donating some parts of his profit there anymore.

[-] 96VXb9ktTjFnRi@feddit.nl 42 points 9 months ago

The Children's Investment Fund Management (TCI) is not a charity, it is a hedgefund. Even this letter was sent on behalf of TCI. They're apparently one of the most activist investors out there. And not activism in a good way, their only focus is maximizing profits. So activism means: demanding lay-offs, doing unsolicited take-overs of other companies, etc. And then after a few years dumping the company again. They themselves probably have all sorts of thoughts about how they play an important function in an economy because they are ruthless and force changes in the markets. To put 'children's' in the name is just a scam that aims to make them sound innocent. But just this fact tells you a lot about how these people operate. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Children%27s_Investment_Fund_Management

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[-] 31337@sh.itjust.works 52 points 9 months ago

Layoffs make no sense when companies can afford to retain their workers. Layoffs typically hurt companies for 3 years after they happen: https://hbr.org/2022/12/what-companies-still-get-wrong-about-layoffs

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] knotthatone@lemmy.one 50 points 9 months ago

Oh, I very much doubt that he's the only billionaire who's written a letter like this to Google in the past year.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 43 points 9 months ago

They've written one like that to every tech company. It's probably just so they can repeat the conditions from before they got sued for colluding to depress employee wages. This has the same effect, except this time it's not collusion, it's doing their fiduciary duty because shareholders are demanding it.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Agent641@lemmy.world 45 points 9 months ago

Fuck, Id like to reduce a certain headcount.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] frank@lemmy.world 44 points 9 months ago

TL; DR We're making a lot of money, but we could be making more if we fuck over 120,000 people that built the thing that is making money.

[-] ChewTiger@lemmy.world 41 points 9 months ago

What a trash bag of a human being.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 39 points 9 months ago

The comp cut thing is going to be interesting to see play out, because that comp is why most people put up with working at places like that. They’re selling their morals. And I can’t honestly blame them that much, considering how unforgiving and brutal the socioeconomic system in this country has become.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 38 points 9 months ago

I think the comments are cutting Alphabet too much slack. Yes the billionaire is heartless, but he isn't wrong. Alphabet was careless. They binged on talent because they did not, and do not, place significant weight on the consequences of their hubris. Why? Because ultimately it is the workers that have to pay the price, not the executives that hired carelessly. If you do not force management to care, they won't.

I always think of Indeed and their CEO. They too hired too many too quickly and were forced to fire. What did the CEO do? Not only did the company make sure the severance package was generous, the CEO took a pay cut too.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Skates@feddit.nl 28 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Dear anyone,

Please kill Christopher Hahn, rape his corpse, impale him through the anus with a spear, display his severed head at the entrance of the city, use this obvious heroic act to make your introduction to politics, with the ultimate goal to get a law passed that get psychopaths like him treated young, or simply disposed of if it's too late and they've hurt (or intend to hurt) too many.

I mean, if you're not busy or anything. Thanks.

Yours sincerely, because I hate myself and want to die, frfr on God no cap, just kill me if you see me, everyone can help with the execution, I give you explicit permission, regardless of local laws,

Christopher Hahne

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] Emerald@lemmy.world 28 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Image Transcription: Text


Dear Sundar,

I have appreciated our recent dialogue concerning Alphabet's cost base. I am encouraged to see that you are now taking some action to right size Alphabet's cost base and understand that it is never an easy decision to let people go.

I argued in my previous letter that Alphabet's headcount has grown beyond what is required operationally. Over the last 5 years, Alphabet more than doubled its headcount, adding over 100,000 employees, of which over 30,000 were added in the first 9 months of 2022 alone. The decision to cut 12,000 jobs is a step in the right direction, but it does not even reverse the very strong headcount growth of 2022. Ultimately management will need to go further.

I believe that management should aim to reduce headcount to around 150,000, which is in line with Alphabet's headcount at the end of 2021. This would require a total headcount reduction in the order of 20%.

Importantly, management should also take the opportunity to address excessive employee compensation. The median salary at Alphabet in 2021 amounted to nearly $300,000, and the average salary is much higher. Competition for talent in the technology industry has fallen significantly allowing Alphabet to materially reduce compensation per employee. In particular, Alphabet should limit stock-based compensation given the depressed share price.

I hope to have further dialogue with you on these matters in due course.

Yours sincerely

[Signature]

Christopher Hohn

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Goodie@lemmy.world 28 points 9 months ago

If he thought $300,000 was a lot, wait until tech workers start avoiding his company (aka the Meta tax).

Or maybe workers wont give a fuck and will just take whatever job is in front of them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] theodewere@kbin.social 22 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

a billionaire can't sleep at night when he sees that number next to his name shrink.. it's just one long, useless whine about the share price..

[-] Sheeple@lemmy.world 21 points 9 months ago

Correction not even shrink. Even if ita acceleration starts to slow down they throw a tantrum

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2024
857 points (97.7% liked)

Work Reform

9857 readers
119 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS