[HN Gopher] Indeed cuts 15% of workforce, 2200 jobs
___________________________________________________________________
Indeed cuts 15% of workforce, 2200 jobs
Author : cridenour
Score : 60 points
Date : 2023-03-22 18:05 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.indeed.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.indeed.com)
| paulpauper wrote:
| That is pretty ironic, I guess. Like firetruck catching fire or
| ambulance getting in an accident.
|
| _2,200 people go. This is roughly 15% of our team._
|
| Why does such a company need 15k employees to begin with? That
| seems like too many for a site that does not produce anything
| tangible. Coding, support, marketing, sales, etc. does it really
| add up to 15K?
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Start a competitor to Indeed and attract their customers with
| your superior cost structure.
| bradhe wrote:
| This is the best comeback to the
| mentally...struggling...people that make the half-baked
| argument that "tech companies are sooooooo bloated"
| rcme wrote:
| Yes because Indeed has literally zero moat /s
| pie420 wrote:
| "Oh, you think Standard Oil or Bell Telephone is overpriced?
| Well why don't you start a competitor and attract customers
| with your superior cost structure." - Megacorp, monopoly
| bootlickers circa 1905.
| asdajksah2123 wrote:
| Since you seem to believe that Indeed is a massive monopoly
| in an industry where it's almost impossible to build the
| infrastructure to reach customers and provide competition,
| why aren't you lobbying for the government to break them
| up?
|
| I'd be interested to see if you could even convince leftist
| anti-corporate monopoly interest groups to go along with
| your plans, never mind the fairly center right US govt.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| A website that hosts job listings might not have as high of
| a barrier to entry as an oil company or telecommunications
| network. Nor does Indeed have any sort of monopoly on job
| listings.
| pastor_bob wrote:
| Indeed is no good. They try to suck everything out of you
| when you apply to a posting on their site, including details
| about your current company. I avoid using them if I can.
|
| They make money purely out of laziness of their customer
| base.
|
| "Where should we post this listing? I don't know...Indeed?"
| reaperducer wrote:
| I can think of 2,200 people he can hire immediately.
| icedchai wrote:
| You probably underestimate the marketing, sales, and support
| aspects. Also, there are no doubt a ton of spam/scam jobs being
| posted constantly. I'm not saying it adds up to 15K, just more
| than you or I would think...
| bsder wrote:
| > Why does such a company need 15k employees to begin with?
|
| Because not everything is tech?
|
| For starters, Indeed is in a field with _legal compliance
| issues_. If somehow "No minorities." ever made it through
| their screening system all holy hell would come down on their
| heads.
|
| That means that probably everything an employer could post
| needs to be vetted by a human eventually. That's a _lot_ of
| people given the number of job postings.
| throwaway5959 wrote:
| This is a really tired trope. Clearly they didn't need as many
| people. Clearly they need more than most people think they do.
| Thetawaves wrote:
| It would be really nice to see the tree diagram that breaks
| the company structure down to ~100 person 'divisions'
| pokey96 wrote:
| Indeedian here, thankful to not have been in the 2200.
|
| Was a bit chaotic this morning, it doesn't seem like there was
| any clear pattern to who got layed off. Managers were given no
| advance notice for this either, know our manager was trying this
| morning to figure out over Slack who was affected by asking
| everyone.
| esel2k wrote:
| If managers didn't know, how was the decision taken? I am a
| manager (not indeed but other company just doing layoffs) here
| and I received a first estimate of my boss and I adjust when I
| will let go whom (based on business needs).
| Ancalagon wrote:
| Indicates this layoff is probably actually cost-cutting
| necessity, given it had to be done immediately with no regard
| to performance.
| 1attice wrote:
| It is probably not very comfortable for the folks whose job
| searches now begin on the website they used to be paid to
| develop. Oof. <3 to the 2200.
| BrentOzar wrote:
| > I take sole accountability for where we are today. I am deeply
| and profoundly sorry. I will be taking a 25% cut in base pay.
| Additionally, more than 75% of my total compensation is directly
| tied to Indeed revenue growth, and is at risk given current
| trends.
|
| That's how you tell people you're accountable.
| Vespasian wrote:
| Maybe I'm imagining it but this letter seems a lot more direct
| than the other ones.
|
| "People loosing jobs" instead of "Puffys getting the
| opportunity to move on.".
|
| Also their yes/no mail has a clear title and they lay down
| policy that fired people get to use slack for a few days to
| "say goodbye to friends" etc.
|
| Not great obviously (it's still kicking them out) but at least
| they are not adding insult to injury.
| SamuelAdams wrote:
| To be fair, stock prices typically go up after layoffs are
| announced. So it's not like he is losing money.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| stock proce isnt revenue growth.
|
| IF comp is tied to revenue, it doesn't matter if the stock
| goes to the moon.
|
| The stock goes up because investors think that _revenue_ will
| go up if they pay fewer salaries.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-03-22 23:02 UTC)