Is there any consequence for execs who don't layoff when they are supposed to? You have to look at the situation symmetrically.

Why does it need to be symmetric? There’s no reason we couldn’t decide that we want to err on the side of employing too many people.

We already do with legislation that requires severance packages and tax benefits for hiring. Many countries go much further.

	▲	civet_java an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> There’s no reason we couldn’t decide that we want to err on the side of employing too many people. One might bring up the personal consequences bourne by surplus employees who're then laid off during the unavoidable corrective phase - or is that not something society should care about? What are you optimising for?
	▲	simianwords 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		If its not symmetric then you bias towards status quo which is a really bad way to act as a CEO. > There’s no reason we couldn’t decide that we want to err on the side of employing too many people. Yeah that's not how a company should run.