Tech Publisher O'Reilly Slashes Jobs 207
An anonymous reader writes "According to the Santa Rosa Press Democrat, geeky tech publisher O'Reilly Media has slashed 14% of its workforce, or 31 people. Founder and tech pundit Tim O'Reilly comments on the layoffs by exhorting people to 'get more with less.' According to the article, 'Just this week... both tech giant Google and book retailer Barnes & Noble announced their first layoffs ever. Other publishing houses, including HarperCollins, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Random House, and Simon & Schuster have frozen salaries or cut jobs, or both.'"
Reactive or Proactive? (Score:3, Informative)
"The Digital Media branch was restructured into one publishing division along with the companyâ(TM)s Missing Manual group, Oâ(TM)Reilly Technology Exchange and its Head First series, Winge said."
Without actually seeing the company's financials, this could well just be standard streamlining for better efficiency, perhaps a proactive move before they're seriously hit. The story noted that they've been through much worse before, after they had to seriously trim their 300+ employees after the dot com bust.
A lot of 'glitches'. (Score:4, Informative)
So has any website sprung up to replace fuckedcompany [fuckedcompany.com]? TechCrunch has their Layoff Tracker [techcrunch.com] as does Forbes [forbes.com]. But nothing quite like the original.
It's getting depressing out there.
Re:More mealy-mouthed BS (Score:2, Informative)
That's irrelevant in this case; O'Reilly is a privately held company.
Re:Bad news is good news (Score:3, Informative)
Complete rubbish (Score:3, Informative)
Are you from the ACT perhaps? Certain locations are subject to a 99 year lease (see Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act 1988 [comlaw.gov.au]), but your broader assertion is wrong.
Re:What can stem this hemorrhage? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What can stem this hemorrhage? (Score:1, Informative)
> You buy a 100 year lease, which can be renewed
> when passed on to family members.
I'm an Aussie and I can categorically say that this is false in over 99% of Australia.
The only place it is true is in the national capital's territory (the ACT, or Australian Capital Territory) where the capital Canberra was created. In the ACT the leasehold system is used apparently to prevent land speculation in the nation's capital.
In the rest of Australia freehold land is the norm.
HTH
Re:What can stem this hemorrhage? (Score:1, Informative)
Sorry, I screwed up the above slightly : even in the ACT leasehold system, the lease can be transferred at will to other people ('buyers') who are not family members.
I've bought and sold houses in the ACT, and we treat it just like it was a freehold sale.
On expiration of the 99 year (not 100 year) leases the ACT government renews them for a peppercorn fee (I think the fee is 5 cents)
Re:News. (Score:4, Informative)
When the economy is good, we see employees jump ship for a 100$ raise all the time, and being so cynical at the same time. During a bad economy, when a company is trying to be nice, no one notice. As a matter of fact, a lot of people called us stupid too, because employees are ungrateful by nature.
I could make a little more money elsewhere, but you couldn't pry me loose from this job. My boss hands me general outlines of projects and then gives me full authority and responsibility to finish them on my own. I can work from home when our babysitter takes a few days off without having to ask permission first. I have my own office with lots of personal stuff in it. The only time he has something to say about hardware purchase requests is when I should have bought stuff earlier instead of trying to make do. My boss didn't buy my loyalty with a paycheck; it'd take a lot more money for me to gladly do weekend projects for a company I didn't like.
You sound like a good boss with your head in the right place. Yes, some employees will take advantage of this and then move on, but isn't that always true in life?