2016 Has Been an Ugly Year For Tech Layoffs, and It's Going To Get Worse, Says Analyst (ieee.org)

IEEE Spectrum writer Tekla Perry writes: Early this year, analyst Trip Chowdhry from Global Equities Research predicted that the tech world was going to see big layoffs in 2016 -- some 330,000 in all at major tech companies. At the time, these numbers seemed way over the top. Then IBM started slashing jobs in March -- and continued to wield the ax over and over as the year progressed. Yahoo began layoffs of some 15 percent of its employees in February. Intel announced in April that it would lay off 12,000 this year. So, was Chowdhry right? "Yes," he told me when I asked him this week. "The layoffs I predicted have been occurring." And worse, he says, these laid-off workers are never again going to find tech jobs: "They will always remain unemployed," at least in tech, he said. "Their skills will be obsolete." Some of these layoffs are due to a sea change in the industry, as it transforms to the world of mobile and cloud. But some are signs of a bubble about to pop. It's all going to get worse in 2017, he predicts, because that's when the tech bubble will burst. Chowdhry, someone who has never been reluctant to go out on a limb, is predicting that'll happen in March.

Comments

Re:"IT" is on its way out

[PRMan]

And worse, he says, these laid-off workers are never again going to find tech jobs

Ha ha ha ha ha. Is he for real? My company currently has 94 open IT requisitions, up from 74 a month ago. And we can barely find anybody to hire anymore, without overpaying the market like crazy. And my recruiters (always maintain good relationships with them) are telling me that every company in Orange County is saying the same thing. They WANT to hire. There's just nobody TO hire.

Re:"Always remain unemployed"

[bluefoxlucid]

"Starting your own business" only works if there's a market. To be more complete (but still horribly undetailed to the point of inaccuracy): there's a total amount of income each year and, thus, a total amount of spendable money in one year's time frame, and what can be sold is what can be produced for less than that amount of money. Products are made by labor time, labor time incurs wages, wages are paid out of revenues, revenues come from consumer purchasing, purchasing comes from income.

A new business either draws purchasing away from an old business or it competes for new purchasing available as population or productivity (amount of stuff made per labor-hour, thus decrease in cost and thus price relative to number of spendable consumer dollars) increase.

More to the point: unemployment has decreased during 2016. The labor force participation rate has increased by 0.5% since September 2015, and the number of employed Americans has increased by 3 million while the number of unemployed Americans has increased by 0.014 million (we didn't add as many jobs as we added people in the workforce, but we added more jobs than the proportional employment rate, thus the unemployment rate went down, the number of employed went up, and the number of unemployed also went up).

Per the past three months, the number of unemployed increased by 0.169 million since July 2016, while the number of employed increased by 0.469.

[...]some 330,000 in all at major tech companies.[...]

[...]"The layoffs I predicted have been occurring." And worse, he says, these laid-off workers are never again going to find tech jobs: "They will always remain unemployed," at least in tech, he said. "Their skills will be obsolete."[...]

I don't see 330,000 newly forever-unemployed IT workers. That would be literally 8.25% of the computer and mathematics workforce. We'd be talking about 13% unemployment today.

Unfortunately, I don't have occupational employment statistics newer than May, 2015. At that time, employment in computer and mathematical occupations number 4,005,250. Some longer-term analysis includes charts that show only normal fluctuation, although computers and mathematical has a long-running up-trend and a current down-trend not substantially different from 2008-2009.

Re: "Always remain unemployed"

[__aaclcg7560]

You couldn't be more wrong. I've done quite a bit of hiring. I guarantee you it was the number one reason you weren't chosen.

You're assuming that employers check the applicant's credit report. I've checked the box on every job application I ever filled out to have a copy of my credit report sent to me. The only time I ever got copies of my credit report was when I got my security clearance two years ago for my current government IT job.

Re:"IT" is on its way out

[NatasRevol]

"Trickle down economics" *is* economics. The effect of the economy being generated out of productivity of people who are capable of saving money in order to form new businesses, that's 'trickle down economics'. That's the only actual economics, there are no other economics at all.

Dude, get off the drugs. Or on. I'm not sure which would actually help you.

Though here's someone who's doesn't buy your bullshit trickledown theories. Because they see & live them first hand.
http://www.businessinsider.com...
Basically, *customers* create jobs. Not rich people.