I keep seeing folks on blind so convinced that hire to fire is a thing. The amount of effort (money and time) companies go through to hire at faang is ridiculous. After all this they want you to succeed. Yes there are bad managers at faang so you could get screwed but don’t assume a new offer is bad from the get go. Work hard and do your best. And yes my statement is true even in Amazon where I worked close to 6 years.
yes lot of misconceptions on blind based on surface level speculation
it is absolutely true
Thanks for confirming Rajesh
I believe hire to fire is not a thing. But when the manager is weak and can not fight for the team, then they are forced to let someone go. In such case they will end up picking up the one with less metrics to show for.
There’s a quota. Someone has to lose the fight no matter what.
So you’re telling all the managers play hunger games with employees at stake?
Let me guess, racism isn’t real either, right?
No no id isn'd real.
How is this even a real question? I’m guess Gringx is a white male
Cool story bro. The amount of effort people put to remain in their jobs is ridiculous as well. Hire to fire is part of that effort. Now go back to impacc chasing
They're an HR. They don't have impacc resume.
it is true. people have been hired only to be fired for no reason. it leaves the fired employee back on the market which would not happen if they never left old job for the bew toxic ones.
It’s about manager incentives not company incentives duh
This is the perspective OP needs to get. Companies I agree won't do H2F but it's managers who have found this as a loophole to continue increasing their org size while balancing mandatory pip quotas
Exactly. Company incentives are not always aligned with employee and manager incentives.
This causes so much anxiety for people, especially for those on work visas. I was one of those who naively thought that managers and leaders really wanted us to succeed, that I wouldn’t be laid off, that my future was secured bc I worked for FAANG. I was on a work visa (H1B) and left to join a smaller tech company bc the VP was courting me. It was for an ambiguous, fluffy role but I didn't mind bc I assumed the VP would always have my back. Fast forward to early 2023, I was laid off on a Monday. Still remember that morning logging on to my laptop and dialing into my 1:1 with my manager. Really excited to dive into the work, and guess what, he told me the company has decided to lay me off. I was shocked and didn't really know how to react. After that call, I received a few emails from HR tying up the loose ends but I felt helpless, directionless and so effing lost. I had 60 days to get the fcuk out of the US but needed to make a decision on next steps within a day or two to stay or go. It was so stressful. All of the assumptions I made were wrong and false. I was hired a few months before and fired a few months later. Sharing this story as a data point that you should always look over your shoulder, have your own back and never trust your manager. Hiring and firing is real -- it is hungers game out there and no one but you yourself are responsible for your own success / failure.
Hiring and firing is real. Can happen for so many realistic reasons. Hire to fire is urban legend. All the reasons mentioned for it just don't match Occam's razor.
It is like correlation isn't causation right? Anyways that is one person's example (my situation) to show that hiring and firing happens. Do people hire to fire? Do they hire after firing? Yes and yes. Do I have solid stats to show? No. You make your own decisions and form your conclusions on managers and whether or not they are for you. Just don't cry or curse when you are betrayed.
Hire to fire does exist in the sense that some company practice % based layoff. Like regardless if there is a real performance issue, they will layoff bottom 10% in rating comparison. And in response to that, they will hire more in advance to fill the layoff. So the cycle goes on. From the big picture, you can see it’s hire to fire in essence. They hire so they can fire.
And they fire so that they can hire. In some ways, this is such a perverted way to show impact or move a vanity metric -- "I hired xx or yy team members" but rarely is the manager metric taken into *serious* consideration. At least I haven't seen how bad feedback has impacted many managers at FAANG. My team manager has 0% manager effectiveness, and he continued to stay on the team while I got a below average rating bc of one negative feedback.
It's continual cleaning, rotating up: they hire a distribution of folks, and fire the bottom performers.
I haven’t seen polar bear in real life doesn’t mean they don’t exist? Right? I can say on tv they are just cgi.
Heard of selective negativity ? People always rant when there is a problem, and don't care if things are going well. Haven't seen a grizzly bear too and people don't bother to talk about it. It doesn't mean they don't exist either or doesn't mean there are more polar bears than grizzly bears .... :)
I've seen polar bears but even then I can say hire to fire is real