Comments | news: Changes at LJ HQ

news

Changes at LJ HQ

Jan 08, 2009 17:31

As has been reported, we had staff cuts at LiveJournal Inc. this week. Early media reports seriously exaggerated the impact of the decision on the continued existence of LiveJournal as a company and misrepresented the scope of the staff cuts. The cuts were part of a restructuring that shifted global design and product development to the LiveJournal ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

thevelvetsun January 9 2009, 01:56:07 UTC

Huh.

Edit: It's worrying that the employees were terminated without warning or severance. The fact that LJ would treat their valued employees so poorly does not bode well for how they will treat their customers in the future.

I'm not saying LJ is going to shut down or anything, but we may see them get rid of Basic accounts without warning or raise Paid Account prices substantially without warning, or other negative changes. And there would obviously be no communication or input from users.

What else is new.

roses_rejoice January 9 2009, 02:03:06 UTC

Actually it's not at all surprising when software developers are let go with no warning or severance. I have known a number of people who worked in software or web design including one at LJ some years ago and it seems like this sort of thing is fairly common. Add to that the overall crappy global economy and the number of people I know from all fields who got pink-slipped just before or just after Christmas and it's even more normal.

thevelvetsun January 9 2009, 02:12:51 UTC

I realize it's not all that rare, but it's still kinda crappy, imo :(

falnfenix January 9 2009, 13:35:33 UTC

well, such is the way of things in Right to Work states.

foxfirefey January 9 2009, 02:13:37 UTC

Yeah, but apparently their PR speakers will tell media outlets otherwise (who, granted, are totally wrong on their numbers) and imply that gossip sites made no support all up.

kwsapphire January 9 2009, 10:14:09 UTC

Yeah, I work in Florida, a Right To Work state. Which really means that a company can fire you for any reason at any time, and is not required to give any kind of notice or severance.

It *is* however, a really crappy thing to do. Especially in this economy. Maybe I've gotten spoiled because I work for an AWESOME company that cares about its employees, even the ones it has to let go. It's just that I used to think LJ was one of those kinds of companies too. Maybe it used to be.

fiona64 January 9 2009, 14:42:54 UTC

This. Letting tech people go without warning prevents them, in theory, from taking things they developed on company time and selling them to someone else.

That said, CA, law requires a 60-day notice be given at the time of separation. This means that, while they may have been walked off the site on Day 1, they are not officiallly "laid off" off until day 60. That means that they do get two months' severance pay as a minimum ... as a paycheck instead of a lump sum.

(We just went through this in my firm ... I still have a job, but the process was explained to all of us.)

juliannajoyful January 10 2009, 07:10:59 UTC

Exactly. It's required in CA and if they didn't give at least that 60 day amount, they will hear about it from the state of CA.

uplinktruck January 12 2009, 04:44:51 UTC

And people wonder why manufacturing and other non-location specific industries will not locate in California...

Well, ok. California has a lot more then that going against the state as far as attracting and keeping business. (Look at the exodus of motion picture and television production for one example.) An outrageous tax system, a massive amount of red tape from multiple agencies, conflicting regulations on everything from idling trucks to how many band-aids you have to have per employee.

Some day people are going to figure out that employers are the good guys. They provide paychecks in exchange for jobs. The more you restrict, complicate, tax and abuse those employers, the more you are going to drive them under ground (illegals and otehr working off the books) or out of state. Either way, the state and its people lose.

juliannajoyful January 12 2009, 04:53:50 UTC

I worked in the financial sector for a hedgefund. You are correct if you are speaking of white collar professionals. If you are anyone else, you do need the protection of a union or of governmental red tape to ensure you will be treated equitably by your employer. I'm fairly moderate economically, but the collapse of the financial sector shows exactly why governmental red tape is needed to control how business operate.

uplinktruck January 12 2009, 05:28:24 UTC

No you don't ( ... )

juliannajoyful January 12 2009, 05:53:46 UTC

Seriously? Are you completely stupid? Have you actually ever worked non union in your industry ( ... )

uplinktruck January 12 2009, 16:48:09 UTC

No, not completely stupid. The completely stupid have difficulties operating computers ( ... )

kimerastorm January 13 2009, 09:56:16 UTC

This is something I am going to watch with interest ( ... )

netter88 June 20 2014, 03:30:33 UTC

it's good

missysedai January 9 2009, 02:04:35 UTC

Edit: It's worrying that the employees were terminated without warning or severance.

I sort of get the impression that you've not been in the workforce for very long, if you've never encountered this. You might want to investigate the doctrine of "at will employment", which allows either party in a non-contract employment relationship to terminate the relationship at any time, for any reason, with or without notice.

Notice and severance are very rare animals in the non-contract employment arena.

The fact that LJ would treat their valued employees so poorly does not bode well for how they will treat their customers in the future.

This was a business decision that has zero impact on customer service. They laid off designers and programmers, not support staff.

Back to all threads