Everyone says this and then when the company experiences a round of layoffs everyone’s job gets harder, service gets worse and delivery slows down

▲

nwiswell a day ago | parent | next [-]

That's not incompatible with many people being unproductive. If you blanket terminate, some of them will have been contributing

▲

jmoggr a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

both things can be true: many people play unnecessary telephone + removing those people disrupts the organization

Both are probably true to some extent, and would vary a lot between different orgs.

	▲	keybrd-intrrpt a day ago \| parent [-]
		> removing those people disrupts the organization Or worse, you removed the workers and left the 'telephone' people. In my anecdotal experience, MOST companies don't take any time to understand what they are cutting. They kill "Project X" so the easy answer is that everyone involved with Project X must go. Regardless if they were useful or could be useful elsewhere. Or they cut by salary, employment length, etc.

▲

kkarakk a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

so what? people still keep using the service and you make more money. the point of a company is to make money not to be as efficient as possible.

when a market is saturated you differentiate by being nicer than the competitors but most markets are not saturated customers have literally no choice.

▲

shimman a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah, the idea that there is a rampant amount of slack in the modern US corporation is just odd. Go speak to workers and ask them if they feel that they have slack.

Slack hasn't been a thing for like 40 years, in fact it's mostly the opposite I'd argue where there is such little slack that employers often steal wages from their workers to gain even more profits.