Author Topic: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent  (Read 50062 times)

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #140 on: 01/16/2019 05:20 am »

So would you prefer to receive an email at home with the bad news, or be told during the work day, at work, and then have to walk past your co-workers to get frisked by security. Personally, I would definitely prefer the notification at home method, but your mileage may vary...

Have you ever faced lay-off before? I have at a previous job, was fortunate to get a last minute infusion of funding that prevented it. My employer was upfront about the situation, and explained that the issue was not due to my performance but the funding mechanism. And they explained it to my face.

If I were to be let go, I would have wanted to get my personal items, and would imagine SpaceX employees will do so as well. So what does that save, other than a manager cowardly hiding behind an email?

Edit: And for those left, it doesn't instill the greatest confidence in the company waiting around for a termination email that never comes. At that point, some of the brightest and best might think about moving employers to find one more "stable."
« Last Edit: 01/16/2019 05:25 am by Ronsmytheiii »

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #141 on: 01/16/2019 05:38 am »

So would you prefer to receive an email at home with the bad news, or be told during the work day, at work, and then have to walk past your co-workers to get frisked by security. Personally, I would definitely prefer the notification at home method, but your mileage may vary...

Have you ever faced lay-off before? I have at a previous job, was fortunate to get a last minute infusion of funding that prevented it. My employer was upfront about the situation, and explained that the issue was not due to my performance but the funding mechanism. And they explained it to my face.

If I were to be let go, I would have wanted to get my personal items, and would imagine SpaceX employees will do so as well. So what does that save, other than a manager cowardly hiding behind an email?

Edit: And for those left, it doesn't instill the greatest confidence in the company waiting around for a termination email that never comes. At that point, some of the brightest and best might think about moving employers to find one more "stable."

Whether it's better to find out at home by e-mail or in person at work is clearly a personal preference.  There are good and bad points to each.  Multiple posters on this site have expressed their opinions both ways.

I find it sad that some people can't respect that different people have different opinions.  Calling it "cowardly" when people clearly honestly disagree is a sad lack of respect for diversity of opinion.

I personally have seen layoffs happen.  The communications chip start-up I worked at was bought just before the 2000 communication bust that followed the dot-com crash.  We had won the market through hard work, but the market suddenly dried up.  The company that bought us (Broadcom) shut down our product line.  Everyone knew layoffs were coming.  Then, people started being called in one-by-one to be told they were being laid off.  Very quickly everyone knew and gathered to await the calls.  Around 90% of the company was laid off.  I wasn't laid off, but I watched most of my coworkers get the call into a meeting room, and everyone knew when they were called that they were being let go.

Since we knew most of the company was being laid off, it wasn't as shameful as it might have been if it was only 10% being let go.  Being publicly revealed to be in the bottom 90% is not nearly as bad as being publicly revealed to be in the bottom 10%.  So, for the SpaceX 10% layoffs, it would be much more humiliating to be publicly laid off at work.

I personally think that the private notification at home is kinder.  I respect that other people disagree.  I just wish that people wouldn't project their own personal preferences on everyone else and assume bad motives for people who made a choice different from the one they would prefer.

EDIT: Clarification: that 90% I'm talking about is 90% of the start-up that Broadcom had recently bought.  It wasn't 90% of Broadcom, which had many other businesses that were doing better at the time.

And it was definitely a traumatic event to go through, both for those let go and those of us who stayed.
« Last Edit: 01/16/2019 05:41 am by ChrisWilson68 »

Offline jpo234

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Liked: 2280
  • Likes Given: 2184
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #142 on: 01/16/2019 07:09 am »
If I were to be let go, I would have wanted to get my personal items, and would imagine SpaceX employees will do so as well. So what does that save, other than a manager cowardly hiding behind an email?

We weren't there, but I don't think this is what happened. There was an all-hands meeting were Gwynne and Elon faced the employees to tell them the bad news. That doesn't meet my definition of "cowardly hiding behind an email".
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline jpo234

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Liked: 2280
  • Likes Given: 2184
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #143 on: 01/16/2019 07:20 am »
WARN data for the layoffs in California:

Quote
These are the 577 positions SpaceX is cutting at its headquarters in a major round of layoffs
Dave Mosher and Samantha Lee 27m

Elon Musk's $30 billion rocket company, SpaceX, plans to lay off about 10% of its employees. A government document lists a majority of the positions being terminated.

https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-layoffs-jobs-terminated-list-california-headquarters-2019-1

Can we draw some conclusions from these numbers? Are there groups or categories that were disproportionately hit by the layoffs? Technicians seem to stand out, but I don't know what percentage technicians represented before the layoffs.
If technicians were hit hardest, then this seems consistent with a slower pace of production due to reuse.

The thinknum analysis that shows hiring for launches and StarLink would indicate that SpaceX doesn't expect a slowdown in actual launches.
« Last Edit: 01/16/2019 07:34 am by jpo234 »
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #144 on: 01/16/2019 08:38 am »
>
Can we draw some conclusions from these numbers?
>

Further down in the article is a chart showing the most affected areas;

Structures (F9 cores?)
Propulsion (Merlin?)
Composites
CNC

About what you'd expect from the F9 core slowdown and SH/SS moving away from composites.
DM

Online Johnnyhinbos

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3863
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 8095
  • Likes Given: 943
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #145 on: 01/16/2019 10:19 am »

So would you prefer to receive an email at home with the bad news, or be told during the work day, at work, and then have to walk past your co-workers to get frisked by security. Personally, I would definitely prefer the notification at home method, but your mileage may vary...

Have you ever faced lay-off before? I have at a previous job, was fortunate to get a last minute infusion of funding that prevented it. My employer was upfront about the situation, and explained that the issue was not due to my performance but the funding mechanism. And they explained it to my face.

If I were to be let go, I would have wanted to get my personal items, and would imagine SpaceX employees will do so as well. So what does that save, other than a manager cowardly hiding behind an email?

Edit: And for those left, it doesn't instill the greatest confidence in the company waiting around for a termination email that never comes. At that point, some of the brightest and best might think about moving employers to find one more "stable."
Years ago, when I worked as a broadcast engineer in television post production, a company I worked for one Friday called the entire staff into a meeting and we were all told to go home, that 50% of us would be laid off. Not 10%, but 50%. We were to wait at home for a phone call over the weekend. While the meeting was happening a locksmith was changing the locks.

Laying off a few people is one thing, laying off large numbers of disparate individuals is another all together. Just because you may react one way doesn’t mean everyone will react the same. It’s a harsh reality. We had valuable client master tapes and even more valuable source footage - I was mature enough to understand the tough decision the owner made to do what was done. That decision saved the company for another five years, five years that gave employment to 50% of the original staff who wouldn’t have without that layoff.

(For the record, I was one of the lucky 50% that got the good phone call and ultimately became Chief Engineer).

And similar things happened to several other companies I worked for after that. TV Post was a harsh business in the 90s. That’s why I work with fish now...
John Hanzl. Author, action / adventure www.johnhanzl.com

Offline Cinder

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 779
  • Liked: 229
  • Likes Given: 1077
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #146 on: 01/16/2019 12:13 pm »
I think the SpaceX style of routinely decimating their workforce and impersonally sending firing/retention emails is immoral and a bad business practice.   Sure, layoffs are sometimes necessary, but the 'tech' world has created a culture of treating workers as chattel; even though they may pay well, they are consumptive of their employees, show now loyalty to their workforce & engender little from their people (although the space mission overcomes this).

Even if you are retained, going through cullings like this has to be extremely demoralizing.   I certainly would never work for a company that behaves like this.   I've avoided Google, Amazon and similar entities for this reason, despite being a prime candidate to work in a decent position there.    I'm not saying to avoid economic realities, I am saying that responsible business value their workforce and treat them as humans should be treated.   This always engendered me with a hard working and loyal labor force.

OK, you would never work for a company that lays off people it doesn't want to have working for it any more.  I am the opposite -- I would not want to work for a company that kept on people forever even if they were no longer the right fit for the company.

To you, it's immoral for a company to cut these people.  To me, it's immoral for a company not to do so.  For the good of everyone, people should not have an assumption of lifetime employment.

People should be free to leave a job whenever they decide it's not a right fit.  When they leave, that can cause a lot of trouble for the company they are leaving, but they still should have that right.  And it works both ways -- the company should have the right to terminate anyone that they decide is no longer the right fit for them, even if it causes problems for that individual.

For either a person to stay at a company when it's not good for the employee or a company to keep an employee that is no longer good for the company is equally bad.

Having companies keep people who are no longer the right fit just drags down all the other stakeholders in the company -- other employees, shareholders, customers, and suppliers -- because the company will not be able to change and improve.  Over time, if lots of companies do this, it will bring down the economy as a whole.  All will suffer.
Further down the same vein.  SpaceX is the opposite of a make-work business.
What is the motivation in treating employees better?  Some humane value.  What is the value of any corporation?  To create wealth, and at the very ultimate end to eliminate scarcity; that's the very end goal.  The business is a means to that end, even if ultimately its contribution is infinitesimal.
Is it realistic to have varied distribution of all business on that spectrum, or should they all be agnostic to that dimension, either self-serving (strictly profit oriented) and/or make-work providers?  The spectrum of convergence between business and "human" ideal.  It sounds naive except it actually does boil down to that -- inevitably, in every single case.

Germaine to the topic: it stands to reason (ethical reason) that at least one or a few businesses set in stone their mission at the human end of that spectrum.  For instance if the business makes it their goal to make humans multiplanetary.  So it would be nonsensical to simultaneously recognize the human values of both that business mission and of those employees' quality of life (in a nutshell), but to only argue for one of those.

Especially when the former, in SpaceX's case (ostensibly), is a greater good than a few employees who more likely than not will recover good employment in due time, and more so when SpaceX is heading into its crucible.  So it would only multiply the importance of SpaceX's success, to weigh the human dimension along with the textbook business dimension of the circumstances now and until the BFS/Starlink/etc systems prove out.

That you don't get a job at SpaceX or arguably any Musk company unless you accept being overworked for the sake of those inherent mission goals, is the exact same thing, as accepting you may not work there anymore if your position doesn't serve those same mission goals you accepted in the first place.  Otherwise SpaceX/etc are effectively just make-work factories. 

I was going to articulate a younger and less insightful and less spaceflight related experience than ChrisWilson's, but it's almost identical and he said it better than I would've. 
It all goes hand in hand.  Either you believe in what you do because of why you do it, or you don't.  Most people who have trouble with losing their job is because they weren't on the same page as the corporate mission/culture in the first place. 

If SpaceX succeeds in jail-breaking us from Earth, this was worth it.  There'll be more spaceflight jobs, sooner.

TLDR  This is like Pascal's wager.  Lucky us, we don't have to wait that long.
« Last Edit: 01/16/2019 12:20 pm by Cinder »
NEC ULTIMA SI PRIOR

Offline laszlo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 920
  • Liked: 1235
  • Likes Given: 530
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #147 on: 01/16/2019 12:51 pm »
What is the motivation in treating employees better?  Some humane value. 
Actually, improved productivity and profits. If those don't result, the humane treatment quickly disappears.

...it stands to reason...
Usually indicates fuzzy logic and incomplete argument to follow.


If SpaceX succeeds in jail-breaking us from Earth, this was worth it.  There'll be more spaceflight jobs, sooner.

In other words, the end justifies the means, regardless of the human, financial or environmental cost.

As far as I can see, the outrage against the layoffs is a sense of actual or vicarious betrayal. People assume that when one works hard and makes great personal sacrifices, one deserves continued membership in the tribe. A layoff violates the assumed bargain.

The problem, if this is indeed the case, is that the employee hired in under mistaken assumptions. The job was not tribal membership, regardless of all the corporate hooraw. It was a job. The only thing people can expect in return for everything is their latest paycheck and benefits. If they understand and accept that fact, and prepare financially for instant termination as soon as they are no longer convenient for the company, layoffs would not be as traumatic.

Note that this is generic, not specific to SpaceX. This is the current state of capitalism in much of the world, and depressing as it may be, employees need to recognize it and adapt.
« Last Edit: 01/16/2019 12:52 pm by laszlo »

Offline Cinder

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 779
  • Liked: 229
  • Likes Given: 1077
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #148 on: 01/16/2019 01:43 pm »
I don't think I can refute that without derailing the topic. 
It's faulty in itself and in understanding what I wrote.  Saved a draft reply for if/where there's room for it.
« Last Edit: 01/16/2019 01:44 pm by Cinder »
NEC ULTIMA SI PRIOR

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #149 on: 01/16/2019 01:56 pm »
What is the motivation in treating employees better?  Some humane value. 
Actually, improved productivity and profits. If those don't result, the humane treatment quickly disappears.

...it stands to reason...
Usually indicates fuzzy logic and incomplete argument to follow.


If SpaceX succeeds in jail-breaking us from Earth, this was worth it.  There'll be more spaceflight jobs, sooner.

In other words, the end justifies the means, regardless of the human, financial or environmental cost.

As far as I can see, the outrage against the layoffs is a sense of actual or vicarious betrayal. People assume that when one works hard and makes great personal sacrifices, one deserves continued membership in the tribe. A layoff violates the assumed bargain.

The problem, if this is indeed the case, is that the employee hired in under mistaken assumptions. The job was not tribal membership, regardless of all the corporate hooraw. It was a job. The only thing people can expect in return for everything is their latest paycheck and benefits. If they understand and accept that fact, and prepare financially for instant termination as soon as they are no longer convenient for the company, layoffs would not be as traumatic.

Note that this is generic, not specific to SpaceX. This is the current state of capitalism in much of the world, and depressing as it may be, employees need to recognize it and adapt.

That's a bit cynical. Companies are run by people, and most of them are capable of empathizing with their employees. Generally companies try pretty hard to keep good employees busy, and don't lay them off at the drop of a hat.

People that hire on to a company that is more likely to lay people off generally expect something for taking that risk. Either work experience that makes you more valuable to other companies, or simply better pay and benefits than other companies. Or more intangible things like helping the company succeed at a mission that one considers important.

Offline IntoTheVoid

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 422
  • USA
  • Liked: 420
  • Likes Given: 134
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #150 on: 01/16/2019 01:58 pm »
https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-layoffs-jobs-terminated-list-california-headquarters-2019-1

Can we draw some conclusions from these numbers? Are there groups or categories that were disproportionately hit by the layoffs?
I think the 6 Cooks were disproportionately affected, and we may now be inundated with even more dropped and rattling silverware during the webcasts.

Edit - Unless those were the people let go...  :o
« Last Edit: 01/16/2019 02:00 pm by IntoTheVoid »

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 2231
  • Likes Given: 1584
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #151 on: 01/16/2019 05:09 pm »
Sometimes businesses have to reduce staff because the company's requirements change. We see that with Block 5 reusability and moving to SS/SH.

I was part of a big layoff a few years ago. The company decided to move to web-based apps, overseas help desk, and some "cloud" apps and storage. They no longer needed a large in-house IT department. Sure, it sucked being told on a conference call I was out of a job, but it made sense. I wasn't working on any new projects and was keeping busy by helping second level support. I knew my time was up.

The company gave us 30 days to help the reorg transition and a large severance package for incentive. They were about as nice and professional as they could under the circumstances.

Unfortunately, SpaceX went the IT company route of immediate dismissal, but that's common in tech industries today. I guess everyone has to suffer because of the possible damage a disgruntled employee can do.

Offline AC in NC

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2484
  • Raleigh NC
  • Liked: 3628
  • Likes Given: 1950
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #152 on: 01/16/2019 05:22 pm »
Much of the late discussion is only very tenuously topical and trends toward "political/religious" quagmire.


Online rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 798
  • Liked: 538
  • Likes Given: 365
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #153 on: 01/16/2019 08:42 pm »
I'm starting to think the layoff could go hand in hand with the decision to not move ahead with the San Pedro factory. Some of these folks could have been transitioning over there. Now they might need to hire new folks in a different location. Easier to do that then ask (and pay people) to move.

Offline rsdavis9

Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #154 on: 01/16/2019 08:47 pm »
Or they had 2 development paths.
CFRP in San Pedro
Stainless Steel.

They recently hired a water tank company to make a spaceship in about 3 weeks.
Guess who wins the work.
Hopefully the fast and cheap all metal design works and gets usable payload to orbit.
With ELV best efficiency was the paradigm. The new paradigm is reusable, good enough, and commonality of design.
Same engines. Design once. Same vehicle. Design once. Reusable. Build once.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #155 on: 01/17/2019 02:27 am »
Or they had 2 development paths.
CFRP in San Pedro
Stainless Steel.

They recently hired a water tank company to make a spaceship in about 3 weeks.
Guess who wins the work.
Hopefully the fast and cheap all metal design works and gets usable payload to orbit.
Except the orbital spacecraft won't be built by a water tank company. It'll be built like Atlas tanks but with internal structure whose only real purpose is to prevent collapse when there is zero relative pressure inside.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Online JamesH65

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1559
  • Liked: 1739
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #156 on: 01/17/2019 10:09 am »
Or they had 2 development paths.
CFRP in San Pedro
Stainless Steel.

They recently hired a water tank company to make a spaceship in about 3 weeks.
Guess who wins the work.
Hopefully the fast and cheap all metal design works and gets usable payload to orbit.
Except the orbital spacecraft won't be built by a water tank company. It'll be built like Atlas tanks but with internal structure whose only real purpose is to prevent collapse when there is zero relative pressure inside.

Citation, or personal opinion?

Offline Elmar Moelzer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3661
  • Liked: 849
  • Likes Given: 1062
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #157 on: 01/17/2019 01:02 pm »
Or they had 2 development paths.
CFRP in San Pedro
Stainless Steel.

They recently hired a water tank company to make a spaceship in about 3 weeks.
Guess who wins the work.
Hopefully the fast and cheap all metal design works and gets usable payload to orbit.
Except the orbital spacecraft won't be built by a water tank company. It'll be built like Atlas tanks but with internal structure whose only real purpose is to prevent collapse when there is zero relative pressure inside.

Citation, or personal opinion?

Quote from: Elon Musk
Stainless steel is correct, but different mixture of alloys & new architecture. Unlike Atlas, Starship is buckling stable on launchpad even when unpressurized.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1076595190658265088
« Last Edit: 01/17/2019 01:02 pm by Elmar Moelzer »

Offline Llian Rhydderch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1237
  • Terran Anglosphere
  • Liked: 1299
  • Likes Given: 9683
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #158 on: 01/18/2019 02:40 am »
Quote
As far as I can see, the outrage against the layoffs is a sense of actual or vicarious betrayal. People assume that when one works hard and makes great personal sacrifices, one deserves continued membership in the tribe. A layoff violates the assumed bargain.

How many of us feel the bargain ought to be only one way? 

If I, the employee, "works hard and makes great personal sacrifices", then the company "owes me" and "violates the bargain" if I am laid off.

But if I, the employee, work for a company that has worked hard to offer me a great position, and met every bargain on their side over a period of time in exchange for my employment, then I feel I have not "violated the bargain" and "I don't owe them anything in particular" if I tell them I'm quitting and leave them.

Why the asymmetry?

Re arguments from authority on NSF:  "no one is exempt from error, and errors of authority are usually the worst kind.  Taking your word for things without question is no different than a bracket design not being tested because the designer was an old hand."
"You would actually save yourself time and effort if you were to use evidence and logic to make your points instead of wrapping yourself in the royal mantle of authority.  The approach only works on sheep, not inquisitive, intelligent people."

Offline Davidthefat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 464
  • Rockets are life.
  • Greater Los Angeles Area, California
  • Liked: 288
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: SpaceX reducing workforce by at least 10 percent
« Reply #159 on: 01/18/2019 02:57 am »
Quote
As far as I can see, the outrage against the layoffs is a sense of actual or vicarious betrayal. People assume that when one works hard and makes great personal sacrifices, one deserves continued membership in the tribe. A layoff violates the assumed bargain.

How many of us feel the bargain ought to be only one way? 

If I, the employee, "works hard and makes great personal sacrifices", then the company "owes me" and "violates the bargain" if I am laid off.

But if I, the employee, work for a company that has worked hard to offer me a great position, and met every bargain on their side over a period of time in exchange for my employment, then I feel I have not "violated the bargain" and "I don't owe them anything in particular" if I tell them I'm quitting and leave them.

Why the asymmetry?



That's personal opinion. Many people do have guilt/inhibitions about leaving a company and team if they find a new opportunity.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0