

SpaceX Layoffs - bane
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35254.0

======
SuperChihuahua
Someone on Reddit said: "These are not layoffs. SpaceX cut the bottom 2-5% of
the company for non-excellence. Most if not all of the positions will be back-
filled with more talented staff."

(Not sure if he/she works at the company)

~~~
easytiger
That's a pretty broken way to run a business IMHO. Also completely illegal in
Europe

~~~
throwaway0010
You don't think businesses should fire under-performers? That's nuts.

~~~
potatolicious
Firing under-performers is one thing, doing it decimation-style en masse is
another. Employees who don't measure up need to be judged on a case by case
basis and removed from the company in a timely, individual manner.

Mass firings, however justified, represent broken management. It means some
poor performers were allowed to remain much longer than they should have, and
that some poor performers have not been given sufficient opportunity to work
with management to resolve issues. It also means morale is going to suffer -
even if every single firing here is well justified, mass firings make everyone
nervous.

I fully expect a healthy organization to trickle away bad hires one at a time
as their unsuitability becomes evident. I don't expect healthy organizations
to disgorge unsuitable employees in large globs.

~~~
throwaway0010
"Mass firings, however justified, represent broken management"

I don't think you've supported this opinion very well. Here's a counterpoint:
Hiring and firing are a completely normal part of a business cycle. Every
company should expect to have some ratio of hiring to firing. And yes, a
firing typically means imperfect hiring practice (which is not the same as
imperfect management) -- but here's the key I believe you may not understand:
The world is imperfect. We can bank on the fact that we make mistakes; we will
always make mistakes.

Your other assertion that morale will suffer is empirically false. I know many
folks at companies with this sort of practice in place and it boosts their
morale because they don't feel like they're dragged down by under-performers.
Maybe it lowers the morale of those who are under-performing, but that's not
exactly a problem, is it?

~~~
easytiger
Those all sound like armchair Aristotelian arguments to me. In my experience
"this policy" or some varient thereof seeks to indicate a management failure
and has sparked exoduses from profitable companies. Of course every business
and every culture is different.

A business that seeks to rate people at failing at something there were at
once determined capable and then later not needs to take a hard look at
themselves. Perhaps the individual has mitigating personal issues; maybe the
job hasn't grown with the person; maybe the company itself has changed and is
less compelling as a person.

At least having given them 6 months of value to prove their worth and then
changing your mind indicates something somewhere has changed.

Also what is this definite metric of performing you just invented? Either the
individual is doing the job or when they slipped you didn't help put them back
on track.

If it is a skilled job I can't imagine the cost of firing then rehiring and
retraining someone to do the job in your company simply because you failed to
pay attention to an employee at once every couple of weeks to see how they are
getting on.

Nonsense, in short.

~~~
throwaway0010
The only nonsense here is your belief that a hiring process can accurately
predict future results. Hiring is incredibly difficult: Vast volumes of
literature have been written on the subject. Mistakes are common; your idea
that business ought not correct for mistakes is pure fantasy.

------
jacquesm
SpaceX has approximately 4000 employees, if the 10% quoted in the article was
accurate then I'm pretty sure that we'd hear a lot more about it. This is
probably an instance of crossed wires.

------
dave1619
Anybody have any confirmation on these layoffs and who were involved?

------
tonyjiang
I'd be very cautious in publishing a link from a forum. The last thing you
want to do is to spread a rumor. Layoffs are mostly well covered by the media.

------
abritishguy
_alleged_

A single post on a forum is hardly compelling. I would say the lack of any
media reports are more compelling.

~~~
kraig
heresy!

------
joshdance
K, no one really knows what is going on here. Maybe each employee was dealt
with on a case by case basis, maybe it was the 'bottom' %2. We can guess and
speculate all we want but no one knows until SpaceX says something.

