Slashdot Mirror


Oracle's Surprise Unannounced Layoffs 'Clear-Cut Teams of Engineers' (ieee.org)

Oracle "swung the layoff axe" Thursday, reports IEEE Spectrum, saying that the move "clear-cut teams of engineers." The exact numbers of employees cut and their specific roles have not been reported by the company, but the layoffs are clearly significant. Fifty in Mexico, 50 in New Hampshire, 100 in India, at least that many in Silicon Valley -- the numbers, according to anecdotal reports on theLayoff.com and from internal chatter, are adding up quickly....

Oracle's layoff day started at 5 a.m. Pacific Time, when an email from Oracle executive vice president Don Johnson with the subject line "Organizational Restructuring" arrived in employee inboxes. The email informed staff members that, going forward, everything in the company would revolve around the Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) operation... Then the email continued with a perky sentence that made some employees furious: "OCI's business is stronger than ever, and this team's future is bright." At approximately 10 a.m., I'm told, just five hours after that email, the layoffs began -- and according to anecdotal reports included significant cuts within at least part of that stronger-than-ever, bright-future cloud business.

Those affected were given 30 minutes to turn in company assets and leave the building, and were told that Friday (today) would their last official day. "The morning felt like a slaughter," one Oracle employee told me. "One person after another...." And, that employee said, the layoff process was handled very badly, with entire teams being ushered into conference rooms as groups and told that they no longer had jobs. This employee indicated that technical teams, particularly those involved in product development and focused on software development, data science, and engineering, seemed to take the biggest hit.

Business Insider reports that Oracle hasn't formally announced the number of people laid off, but adds that "One source we spoke to was told by his manager that 1,500 people worldwide were cut."

180 comments

  1. Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He spends his fortune on on yachts and whiskey while Bill Gates spends his on vaccines in Africa.

    1. Re: Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He should be spending it on bail and lawyer fees.

    2. Re:Larry Ellison by voss · · Score: 5, Funny

      Its hard to find someone that makes you feel warm and fuzzy for Bill Gates.

    3. Re:Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Learn some computing history, tool.

    4. Re: Larry Ellison by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1, Insightful

      But neither of them are CEOs of those companies. Maybe a decade or two ago, but not now. You should instead focus on current management?

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    5. Re:Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Proof once again that big tax cuts for the wealthy and big tax cuts for business creates jobs!!!

    6. Re:Larry Ellison by haruchai · · Score: 2

      Its hard to find someone that makes you feel warm and fuzzy for Bill Gates.

      And yet Larry Ellison almost makes it look easy. That's quite a talent.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    7. Re:Larry Ellison by jpaine619 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah. And you think those yachts are free? How many people are employed building one of those boats? Hundreds? All down the supply chain, that's probably not an unreasonable guesstimate. All of that $120M is plowed right back into the economy at the lowest level you can - Construction jobs.. That money is spent in the community and works its way up..

      Bill Gates work, while beneficial to humanity, doesn't create a whole lot of jobs. A few scientists and aid workers I suppose. Ellison's money is directly beneficial to American workers.

      How many people to crew the yacht? 23 full time jobs. Just for his boat! His previous yacht (now owned by David Geffen) has a crew of 45.

    8. Re:Larry Ellison by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Fuck off, socialist! Your kind will be dealt with in course...

    9. Re: Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatâ(TM)s the matter snowflake, triggered by your own rhetoric? All he said was tax cuts create jobs.

      Oh, thatâ(TM)s right, they donâ(TM)t, they concentrate wealth. And you want to keep yours, and fuck everyone who suggests you should pay your fair share. Good to know what weâ(TM)re dealing with, but weâ(TM)ve got your number at least, asshole.

    10. Re: Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Youâ(TM)re defending yacht building as âcreatingâ(TM) 100s âthe lowest levelâ(TM) jobs, while 1500 STEM jobs are cut?

      Really asshole?

    11. Re: Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they have any talent they will have a new job in a month, tops. I get calls every day.

    12. Re: Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Calls every day... from Indian visa-fraud fake recruiters

    13. Re:Larry Ellison by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      All of that $120M is plowed right back into the economy at the lowest level

      Yeah, because the people running the yacht-building company are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts, and they're not collecting any profit. Er, wait...

      Bill Gates work, while beneficial to humanity,

      Bill Gates started with BASIC on paper tape, and if your tape was bad and broke he wouldn't replace it.

      Then he CEO'd Microsoft, which was found to have abused its market position in basically every possible anticompetitive fashion.

      Then he moved his ill-gotten gains into the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, where they can't be taxed. (And there are numerous ways to get your money back out of a charitable trust.) Since then he's spent his money spreading Big Pharma's chosen IP laws around the globe, and on "improving" education in ways that actual educators (and those who study education) say actually harms education. He has eradicated zero diseases, at least in part because some governments won't deal with him, because you have to agree to strong IP law protection for pharmaceutical companies in order to get medical aid.

      IOW, Bill Gates' work is neither beneficial to humanity nor job-creating.

      How many people to crew the yacht? 23 full time jobs. Just for his boat! His previous yacht (now owned by David Geffen) has a crew of 45.

      Wow, that's two drops in the bucket!

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    14. Re: Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He should have joined John McAffee down to Belize.

    15. Re: Larry Ellison by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      They don't create wealth.
      Customers create wealth
      Workers create products
      Products bring in customers who spend
      Capitalists just keep development money unavailable to those who don't create the MOST income for the LEAST product in the SHORTEST time.

    16. Re:Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, buying unnecessary and high value luxury goods is one of the things the obscenely wealthy can do which benefit everyone. The problem is that most of their money is not used this way.

      Most of their money ends up tied in investments, and not of the noble visionary high risk kind. They're the investors that want your company to stop innovating and just keep printing money forever. The other big outlet are bogus charities that are more about avoiding taxes and influence peddling than actually benefitting anyone, and real estate purchases which, because real estate only increases in "value", do the most to increase living costs.

      In contrast, while Bill Gates also buys some crazy expensive shit, his charity work is actually work. He is legitimately trying to make sure his charity dollars are being used well. While I loathe his company, I can respect what he built and what he is trying to do now that he's not in the position of being technological Shit Lord. While I very much hope that his money finds a way out of his estate and its control after he and his wife pass, and his children are forced to genuinely work for a living rather than become Donald Trumpish spoiled brats, I feel like he's making a better effort than most on demonstrating the obligations of wealth.

    17. Re: Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can learn to co... oops.

    18. Re: Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It always cracks me up that people see charity as charity and not the tax haven it is. He is not giving his kids billions in inhertence because then it's taxed, he's giving them an institution that they can draw on for the rest of their lives and many generations to come. And the kicker is other wealthy people will give money to these billionaires so they too don't have to pay taxes.

    19. Re: Larry Ellison by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      You underestimate the control they still have. Think about it: who in the world could confront Bill Gates over any substantive Microsoft issue (for example, CEO succession) without being summarily evicted from any relationship with Microsoft?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    20. Re: Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Customers don't create wealth either. For frigg's sake, are people even educated beyond a third grade level any more????

      Customers exchange wealth for goods and/or services. Wealth is generated from renewable commodities which get sold and establish a baseline on which all other real world goods and services of a given market are based. If those base commodities are not present, currency has lottle to no value and everything based in any way even remotely on that currency is, by extension, less valuable.

      It is part of the reason why stuff today costs so much more than it did in the past. It also kept the Achillies tendon of capitalism in the past, hoarding wealth, from bringing about the collapse of the entire system.

      It doesn't matter how good a system is, if it doesn't work to benefit the majority, and a minority can end up exploiting it all, then it WILL collapse.

    21. Re: Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yep. If he was really charitable there wouldn't be entire communities in the US Appalachian region without indoor plumbing and electricity....it's more fashionable on the "world stage" to solve problems outside the US than within it. He doesn't care if parts of tbe US are effectively akin to an u der developed, third world, country, he cares about showing off by exploiting one to "try" to help the other.

      Feck the people who think they are world savers. Feck the people who think CS jobs belong anywhere near being related to actual science and engineering jobs or are any more demanding than other technical jobs. The more programmers put out to pasture, the less overhyped automation bullsh#t salespitches we will have. And all the world will be the better for it.

      https://youtu.be/otgjdSa6ceA

    22. Re:Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can only own so many yachts. He is not constantly building new ones to provide steady jobs for yacht builders.

    23. Re:Larry Ellison by hambone142 · · Score: 1

      Larry's not running Oracle anymore.

      Mark Hurd is their current hatchet man.

    24. Re:Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol run along kid, the grownups are talking.

    25. Re: Larry Ellison by Beeftopia · · Score: 1

      Demand + [good | service] creates wealth, not supply.

      I could create thousands of balls of bellybutton lint. If no one wants them, they're worthless. There's no demand for them. OTOH, I could create a car windshield that is totally hydrophobic and obviates the need for windshield wipers and frost scrapers. There would be great demand for that and that would create wealth. If I could produce enough that is.

    26. Re:Larry Ellison by Beeftopia · · Score: 1

      Bill Gates work, while beneficial to humanity, doesn't create a whole lot of jobs

      The improvement in the quality of life is the ultimate end goal. Jobs and money are means to that end.

    27. Re:Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bill Gates is pretty warm and fuzzy these days.

      Check out his charity tennis event with Roger Federer and John Isner.

    28. Re: Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. Wish I had mod points. I'm pretty fed up with the lie of how there's an ocean of jobs out there and you're worthless if one doesn't fall in your lap between the office door and your car. I get a dozen e-mails and LinkedIn hits a day and can barely get an interview every other month, much less any feedback. It's all a scam.

    29. Re: Larry Ellison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And most of those jobs get less than 1% of the revenue of companies they get employed in.

      So shut the hell up and don't give us the he created jobs by buying another ridiculous yacht argument.

    30. Re:Larry Ellison by Micah+NC · · Score: 1

      But think of if the government had been directing the construction. They could have paid a cut of the money to attacking the tea party.

      This whole thing about government not getting to attack people based on their political beliefs is a race to the bottom !

  2. 1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by blind+biker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Regardless, I await confirmation that the main cuts were in their cloud operations.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    1. Re:1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      End game for Oracle is to only employ lawyers and salesmen.

    2. Re: 1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oracle has two (yes two) public clouds. Maybe they are closing one. Not a lot of info yet to tell what's really going on.

    3. Re:1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't agree with that but, it does seem like Oracle is headed for the 'ash bin of History'. So much like SUN, which never took the threat of cheap commodity hardware seriously even though the same development equation allowed them to upgrade their own product lines. What a tremendous blind spot in an otherwise great company. In my old days of being a tape ape I helped decommission a data center. Loaded tons of UltraSPARC hardware into a semi bound for who knows where. Wish I had liberated a server/workstation combo; they would easily do whatever I have to do these days and my hearing is so bad I could tell visitors 'huh, what noise?"

    4. Re:1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by jlowery · · Score: 1

      As the financial sector has shown, there's more money to be made shuffling virtual paper around than there is in actually making useful things.

      --
      If you post it, they will read.
    5. Re:1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by Kokuyo · · Score: 2

      Not that Oracle has a lot of experience with "useful things" :D.

    6. Re:1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scott did a great job in the beginning, but made several strategic mistakes
      before selling to Oracle. One of the greatest was ignoring the desktop.

      They were right friggin' there and basically froze R&D into expanding it further.
      He wanted to compete w/big iron (IBM) but didn't realize IBM was more than
      just hardware - it was entrenched in COBOL -- that's what sold the majority of
      IBM hardware. Sun had great hardware, but nothing to keep customers once
      cheaper, more reliable hardware became mainstream. Very sad...

      CAP === 'amuser'

    7. Re:1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by jafac · · Score: 1

      aw, how cute. You think that Salesmen will still be useful when Larry gets everyone vendor locked-in.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    8. Re:1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by careysub · · Score: 2

      Oracle has vendor lock-in for major corporations. Getting off of Oracle, with all its SQL customizations, is very expensive and time consuming. This is much harder than swapping Linux for Solaris.

      I haven't encountered any recently founded firms (last 15 years is "recent" here) who use Oracle. Who want to be subjected to Oracle's "audits"?

      But the long terms savings in not having to ship slabs of corporate revenue off to Larry Ellison's portfolio are considerable.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    9. Re: 1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our customer has their own architects. They said that only Oracle has enough performance to run their system (I doubt that they ever measured and compared it really). We redesigned their system using MariaDB with 1000 times better performance. There are still some smaller apps that need Oracle but as soon as those are rewritten Oracle will lose one rather big customer.

    10. Re:1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sun had great hardware ...

      Gotta disagree with you there. Sun seemed fixated with weird hardware, probably the second weirdest hardware I ever worked on (Univac was the worst).

      A Sun trainer once told me a simple assignment statement could cause as many as 26 memory references on an E10000 machine. Just weird.

      Do you know about the gamma ray burst problem on the F15000? Weird.

      I don't miss Sun.

    11. Re:1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      End game for Oracle is to only employ lawyers and salesmen.

      ... and license auditors.

    12. Re:1500 out of 137000 seems comparatively small by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      They get locked in to the software, not the cost of it.

      For example, lately Oracle has been offering to "forgive" some backdated license fees if a customer agrees to become an Oracle Cloud subscriber. Gotta pump those usage figures!

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
  3. Oracle sucks by mobby_6kl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A few hundred is hardly a significant number across a large organization like Oracle, my own company (a competitor) is cutting way more than that. What seems to be the difference is they're handling it absolutely in the worst possible way, for no reason kicking people out on the spot instead of relying on attrition, early retirements or at least providing a reasonable heads-up to those affected.

    1. Re:Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I remember when I was finishing at my state college way back in '91 and learning programming was all the rage. "If you become a programmer you'll be set for life."
      I didn't believe them and, although I did lear some programming, I never put all of my eggs in a single basket. I do PC, Mac and server support along with web coding and design and technical writing for support manuals.

      It's damned hard to look at a promised "career" like programming and realize it was nothing but a "job" to your boss.

      Bread line is that away, folks.

    2. Re:Oracle sucks by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

      A few hundred is hardly a significant number across a large organization like Oracle,

      A few hundred employees are not a large percentage of Oracle's total number, but the headline implies that they are firing programmers, and their total number of programmers is vastly less than the total number of persons in their employ. If they are truly letting a large number of engineering staff go, it's a sign of further impending change.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Plus any decent engineering staff left, will be looking for work now, especially in the cloud space which is in huge demand.

    4. Re:Oracle sucks by rnturn · · Score: 2

      ``...no reason kicking people out on the spot instead of relying on attrition, early retirements or at least providing a reasonable heads-up to those affected.''

      Summer's coming. Maybe Larry needs to gas up the yacht.

      --
      CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    5. Re:Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama's post-2008 economy, the ownership of which was taken by Trump, is a souffle. Looks great on paper and TeeVee, but goes to one knee with down days that wouldn't even earn mention in the papers of a couple decades ago. The well-employed, if they're smart, ignore the cheer leading and are hunkering down. Oracle HR sees they can't count on attrition to achieve goals fast enough so they sharpen the axe. Never met Ellison but I don't begrudge him his success or his money. His company payed out millions of payroll checks to people over the years. The ignorants never seem to realize that, probably because they never cashed one. But whose fault is that?

    6. Re:Oracle sucks by tomhath · · Score: 2

      they're handling it absolutely in the worst possible way

      Nope. Heavy handed as it seems, the only way to make cuts like this is to identify the people who have to go and get it over with quickly. Otherwise the good people leave and you're stuck with people you don't want.

    7. Re:Oracle sucks by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I''ll disagree with this. The "good people" taking off is always a risk when money at a company is tight and the economy is not tumbling. It can make sense to cut entire teams and projects. The _remaining_ good people are now, all of them, flight risks, because they know that they will be treated poorly and their teams discarded abruptly.

    8. Re:Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We just had a layoff at my company last fall - The people on my team that were affected got *6 months notice!!!!*

    9. Re:Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      software engineers will have zero issues transitioning to a new position very quickly - In the last 10 years, I've switched jobs 3 times, and haven't looked longer than a week for a new job - not to mention every switch resulted in a massive pay bump.

    10. Re:Oracle sucks by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      relying on attrition, early retirements or at least providing a reasonable heads-up to those affected.

      Attrition means the best people leave, because they have the greatest opportunities elsewhere.

      Offering early retirement is similar, good people leave, and they are stuck with the dregs.

      Giving people a "heads-up" means you have people on payroll for weeks or months that know they are being cut, are not doing much useful work, and are dragging down morale.

      Oracle made the cuts in the best way they could. If a product line is being ended, it is silly to keep people around with no useful work to do. It is bad for them, it is bad for Oracle, and it is bad for the wider economy.

    11. Re:Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a) "Have to go" doesn't apply here. Oracle is doing fine and this isn't after a merger. If layoffs happen out of the blue this makes the good people leave.

      b) Telling people to be out of the building in 30 minutes is a horrible way to get rid of employees. It doesn't give them time to find a new job or to get contact information from coworkers e.g. to serve as references. For some careers (those with many applicants for open positions, such as legal jobs), being unemployed while looking for a job is seen as a red mark: You've got 300 applicants, why not discard those who are unemployed, just in case they were let go because they didn't measure up?

    12. Re: Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shanghaied Bill sure does love laying off American workers so his upper class twit bosses can buy bigger yachts.

      It's a race to the bottom - and we're winning!

    13. Re: Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're hoping you leave before then so they don't have to pay unemployment benefits.

    14. Re:Oracle sucks by OYAHHH · · Score: 1

      I really hate to burst your bubble but you have zero idea what you are talking about.

      --
      Caution: Contents under pressure
    15. Re: Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Employers owe their employees nothing aside from what is stipulated in their contracts. People who fail to realize this assume a level of loyalty that is meant for members of a family- not for the inner-mechanations of companies whose sole goal is to make money.

      No fair? Hate it? Start a for-the-worker collective/corportation, pool your money together, and do what Mondragon in the Basque Country has done.

    16. Re:Oracle sucks by Njovich · · Score: 1

      A few hundred is hardly a significant number across a large organization like Oracle, my own company (a competitor) is cutting way more than that.

      A competitor of Oracle, is that like the IRS? Mafia? Or do they compete in a different area than brutally forcing companies to transfer money?

    17. Re:Oracle sucks by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 2

      Layoffs come in threes.
      I've been in big corporations long enough to know the runes.

      I was once laid of, and I learned about it from the CEO of another company, who'd been told by the CEO of the company I worked for. He head hunted me before I was laid off.

      Out the door Monday at 11.00am, after the 'big announcement'. 12.00 noon, working and the new place. Unemployed for 1 hour.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    18. Re:Oracle sucks by tomhath · · Score: 1

      Good people are always a flight risk because they can get another job easily; but that also gives them some reassurance when they survive a layoff (been there several times). Jumping ship just because there was a layoff doesn't make sense anyway, because there's no guarantee you're going to a more secure job than the one you left.

    19. Re: Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But still rather pay them for 6 months. Math doesn't add up bunk.

    20. Re:Oracle sucks by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      Oracle is already known for cutting positions all the time. It is surprising that anyone would bother to be more cutthroat than the usual. Probably someone's MBO gave a number for shifting resources out of some divisions, so that those salaries could be spent building up their cloud offering, and that executive realized that the easiest way to make the quarter's full bonus was to just take the direct path.

    21. Re:Oracle sucks by careysub · · Score: 1

      And if you paid attention to how they handled the lay-off announcements, it is an excellent reason never to interview at Oracle.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    22. Re: Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The company may not have had to pay severance in that case.

    23. Re: Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Layoffs come all the time. People groups unrelated things into sets of three and think it is an example.of the rule of three, as opposed to just a other example of their aggregational habit.

    24. Re: Oracle sucks by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression it was a real thing, constructed around market reporting times so that the 'pre arranged' trades of execs line up with positive stock responses to events.

      I could name names, but I don't like being sued.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    25. Re: Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're good at your job, seeing the deadwood around you get flushed out and removed can be affirming.

    26. Re: Oracle sucks by sphealey · · Score: 1

      Can't agree with that. First layoff is designed by existing management to "clean house", "take us to the next level", etc. First layoff does not achieve those goals and usually takes the organization in the opposite direction, so existing management panics and does a second round of layoffs (actually touching a few of their friends). This makes things really worse, so finally the board of directors fires existing management and brings in new management, but by that time the situation is so bad that the new management has to cut down whole sections of the forest to have any hope of saving the rest (although they may just enjoy firing people and closing divisions too).

    27. Re: Oracle sucks by sjames · · Score: 3, Insightful

      More succinctly, first they downsize, then they rightsize, finally they capsize.

    28. Re:Oracle sucks by sjames · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, offering some severance and help finding the next job is a cheap way to avoid lawsuits and cultivate the right image to retain people who might otherwise contemplate jumping ship on their own time table.

    29. Re:Oracle sucks by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, offering some severance and help finding the next job ...

      Oracle is offering severance, and anyone who can't find a new job in today's economy has no pulse.

    30. Re:Oracle sucks by Creepy · · Score: 1

      With that said, it was a 1% workforce cut. I've been in far worse technical layoffs - one company I worked for (that eventually fired me as well) had massive layoffs filling auditoriums in multiple waves - roughly 40%, followed by 30% - when the tech bubble broke in 2001, Then they rebuilt and had a 30% layoff again in 2008. In my case I survived the worst of it but my salary bubbled to the top and I got caught in a 15% cost cutting layoff along with several of the best engineers in the company. Honestly, I think they're f**ked trying to replace us with new hires or desperately scrambling to find anyone with any knowledge of certain areas, but I don't give a shit. My next placement will likely be in direct competition with my former company for product consulting on the product I formerly worked on. I couldn't do that right away (without legal problems - the agreement did include firing as a cause) because of a non-compete clause, but anything goes now, and I will likely work with 3 of the best customization engineers that company had because we all got laid off together and joined this company.

    31. Re:Oracle sucks by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 1

      Let me introduce you to Larry Ellison's favorite management technique "Environment of Fear" where everyone stabs each other in the back in the hopes that they're not the next one to be shown out the door.

      It's the poison that fucking asshole introduced to our industry. Every time he takes his fucking racing yacht out I hope it flips and rends him into unrecognizable catfood sized shards.

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
    32. Re: Oracle sucks by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      "Seeing the deadwood around you get flushed" often has little to do with layoffs. The best people, the ones who accomplish the most, often upset management and have their best projects set aside in a layoff. I've personally volunteered to be laid off because I'd trained my crew, they could handle the maintenance mode the projects turned into after the layoffs, and I had better freedom to move or switch to a new role elsewhere.

      > Jumping ship just because there was a layoff doesn't make sense anyway,

      Abandoning a sinking ship often makes excellent sense, especially if when it's run aground due to technological obsolescence, market changes, or failures against its own bad management or overwhelming competition.

    33. Re:Oracle sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, hell, if we're doing *war stories*.....

      I was working at one of the "content delivery networks" at the height of the dotcom. When they finally got to the third round of layoffs, several dirtbags in my department were deliberately refusing to automate or document their work to protect their jobs. I called them unethical and spiked their references, because they could both be replaced with popular open source tools that scaled and provided smoke testable configurations instead of fragile, hand-edited manual configurations. I'd also noticed the millions of dollars of hardware that had simply been commented out of the configuration files.

      The day of the third round of layoffs, the layoffs showed up on www.fuckedcompany.com the day before, and management spent the next day lying about it to people's faces. By the end of the day, when I'd been so busy getting work done and working around my withdrawn privileges and finally was notified, three department heads saw me on my way out the door with my box of stuff and expressed shock because I actually *collaborated* with them instead of ignoring them. Two of them literally *screamed* when they saw me heading for the door, they were so shocked, and all of them said they'd have a job for me on Monday.

      They weren't allowed to rehire me. At first, I believed the company about "SEC requirements" preventing them from re-hiring anyone laid off. Later, I found out that at least some of those missing computers were *stolen* and personally resold, by a department head who'd realized I was about to catch him and who had me blackballed.

  4. Ellision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is a greedy SUN of a bitch.

  5. My sympathies for the people.. by CptLoRes · · Score: 5, Informative

    but none for the company. Bullying and extortion is not a valid long term business strategy.

    1. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Define long-term? Larry Ellison is going to die a very, very rich, old man.

    2. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And he can bring none of it with him.

    3. Re: My sympathies for the people.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who knows. May be we are all in a game and prizes are awarded afterwards based on net worth.

    4. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes but that is not _valid_: Larry Ellison will die knowing he fucked everyone over and made the world a worse place, ultimately on his death bed he will know the world is better off without him.

    5. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by timeOday · · Score: 1

      I hope, or at least wish, you are right.

    6. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Long term for companies is 100+ years.

    7. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay there, sport. Don't get all worked up about this.
      Why don't you toddle along and play in the sandbox for a while. The adults are talking.

    8. Re: My sympathies for the people.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who knows. May be we are all in a game and prizes are awarded afterwards based on net worth.

      The real funny part would be if the value of the prizes are calculated in inverse relationship to net worth.

    9. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Bullying and extortion is not a valid long term business strategy.

      It's worked for MS and Oracle for 3+ decades. That's "long term" by corporate standards.

    10. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by gtall · · Score: 1

      Neither is spending billions on stock buy backs to keep the price up. They've spent a bundle in 2017-18 on buy backs and are continuing it...well, what better place to put the last tax giveaway. It's all the rage among big companies and Oracle never had any new ideas of their own.

    11. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by gtall · · Score: 1

      Yes, but Larry intends to take his wealth with him, he's sure St. Peter can be bribed.

    12. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Corporations are legal fictions. It's all people — and some of the people at Oracle are scum. Of course, those aren't the people getting laid off. They're the ones deciding that these people will be laid off.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re: My sympathies for the people.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real funny part would be if the value of the prizes are calculated in inverse relationship to net worth.

      Maybe that's what Jesus meant when he said those who are last now will be first then, and those who are first will be last?

    14. Re: My sympathies for the people.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can hope some day a receptionist will kill kim with a scissors.

    15. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [...] Bullying and extortion is not a valid long term business strategy.

      Yes it is: https://www.yakimawa.gov/

    16. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 1

      And hopefully very very soon.

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
    17. Re:My sympathies for the people.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Donald Trump very clearly disagrees with you.

  6. Find a better employer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It always sucks to lose your job unexpectedly, but on the other hand, maybe this is a good opportunity to find a more ethical employer that isn't a negative influence on the entire industry.

    Engineers who work for companies like Oracle and Facebook should understand that their salary literally comes from doing evil in the world.

    1. Re:Find a better employer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oracle is just a corporation, with all the connotations that may entail. They're just trying to make the best software for running your business...and extract as much money and vendor lock-in as physically possible at the same time. Facebook, on the other hand, is actively working to undermine democracy, free speech, and private society in their goal to reparadigmize the concept of friendship. It's apples to oranges between the two.

  7. Layoff Axe? by Freischutz · · Score: 1

    Oracle "swung the layoff axe...

    I like to think of it as: 'drawing the magic cost cutting sword from the stone of greed'.

    1. Re:Layoff Axe? by PPH · · Score: 1

      Larry Ellison: "I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK."

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Layoff Axe? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Right.. Because it's greed to not pay to employ people you don't need. Guess every single company on Earth is greedy since they don't employ people they don't need..

      You have a number of employees that you need to get the job done and that's how many you employ.

      Why does basic logic escape you people?

    3. Re: Layoff Axe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope u get laid off. I hope u get a perm lay-off you fucking cuck.

    4. Re:Layoff Axe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, none of this is true, except at an (seemingly drug-induced) level of fuzzy irrationality that serves your slavish Right-wing ego.

      Companies understand they cannot employ exactly the people they need at all times, that's why on a day-to-day basis, work can be "slow", and they don't, per your asinine perspective, propose that they send people home on each individual day that the company hasn't queued up a full 560 minutes of zero-downtime breakneck work for the employees.

      That's why the notion of "salary" exists. That's why there's an implicit understanding at hire that business reality exists, and they don't stress, "well to be complete and ethical in our expectation settings, we want to stress we're likely to fire you at any given moment". Per your ridiculous notions, every hire is an immoral bait-and-switch by the corporation.

      Companies strive not to do that. Historically, if a company had to lay off employees, it was a shame for the -company-, not for the employees. It is directly indicative of bad capacity planning, a lack of foresight, a lack of training for other possible roles at the company, all of which are indicative of market (and management) inefficiency. In a more ethical economy would be punished. Now it is not, because stock price for the next quarter bullshit rules all.

      I don't know what sad company within a sad existence your sad self lives in, but as a developer currently with a good company, in a 30-year career working at decent companies at minimum, I find you and your standards and outlook utterly pathetic. Please refrain from infecting others with your demented ideas and expectations. Thanks.

    5. Re:Layoff Axe? by jafac · · Score: 2

      That's a matter of opinion.

      When your product is technology, and you fire engineers, .
      Instead of the executives who did nothing but planned the company into a corner, risking nothing, maybe those are the people who are "not needed".

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  8. And yet... by rnturn · · Score: 1

    ... I'm always getting emails from recruiters letting me know that Oracle is hiring. Probably because I have nothing to do with database internals development and engineering. It will be interesting to see just what the final numbers are and what areas of the company got hit hardest.

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
  9. Lifecycle of a Star by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Suns become Oracles, Oracles become Supernovae, spreading new engineering to the galaxy. The only thing that remains is the Great Cloud of Externalies, the shell of what once was.

    1. Re:Lifecycle of a Star by AlanObject · · Score: 1

      I remember a while back that it was damn near impossible to get a resume for an engineer that didn't have Televideo on it.

    2. Re:Lifecycle of a Star by sg_oneill · · Score: 1

      If Oracle went supernova it wouldnt just spread new engineering to the galaxy. It'd be showering the galaxy with f***ing lawyers too

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    3. Re:Lifecycle of a Star by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is that issue with the spinning Oracle core remnant. Will the spinning Ellison collapse into singularity, or will he remain in this world enjoying Azure caused by the Sun?

  10. Oracle Cloud? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who even uses it? And those that do, are they doing anything with it other than hosting an Oracle DB instance? If Oracle DB existed only in their cloud, they wouldn't have to deal with installation/maintenance support at all.

  11. First world problems... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    âoeFelt like a slaughter.â GMAFB. Probably get severance and unemployment. Ask the two girls in Morocco what a slaughter feels like after you reattach their heads. Damn whiners.

    1. Re:First world problems... by jpaine619 · · Score: 2

      Probably? Of course they got unemployment.. It's specifically for people who are laid off (of fired without cause).

      No shit it's a First World Problem.. That's why why so many people move here from shitty countries. The US imports 1,000,000 (and has peaked at 2,000,000 in recent decades) people a year who have decided HERE is better than THERE.

      HERE is better than THERE because we run shit differently. Fuck you and your obvious anti-west bias.

  12. A Message from MariaDB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Buh-bye Larry!

  13. My wife. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My wife is a director of marketing has a liberal arts degree and a MBA in Marketing from a top 20 school.
    Her annual bonus pays a year's tuition for one of our girls at a private university.
    The free markets say that we techies aren't worth as much as we think.
    Fortunately, my science loving daughter is pre-med and doing quite well - she got a 'B' in Organic Chemistry even though she had one of those asshole chemistry professors who thinks they've been anointed to "weed out" future doctors for some idiotic reason.

    1. Re: My wife. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Tech jobs: Great shot at a stable low 6 figure salary.

      Business jobs: Bad shot at a VP job making high 6 figures.

      Sure, you can make more money and do less in business, but the competition is fiercer. You need to have the right look, be good with people, know the right people, etc.

      For the tech people who got fired, who gives a fuck. If I got fired tomorrow Iâ(TM)d shrug my shoulders, I get offers for jobs 24/7 because I keep my resume up to date and I am always learning new things. If they cannot get a new job then they were coasting and they suck, more reason for them to have gotten fired.

    2. Re: My wife. by sabri · · Score: 0

      For the tech people who got fired, who gives a fuck. If I got fired tomorrow IÃ(TM)d shrug my shoulders, I get offers for jobs 24/7 because I keep my resume up to date and I am always learning new things.

      Exactly.

      --
      I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
  14. Gearing up for recession by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the entire economy is prepping for recession. It sucks. We all know it's coming and nobody's doing a damn thing to stop it. Instead companies are slashing staff so they can use the money for buy backs to boost their stock when it hits so the CEOs don't take a pay cut.

    We could stop this easily. End buy backs. Increase regulatory oversight so that companies can't gamble on the economy and then hold us all hostage for a bail out. Start spending on Demand Side economics. Do the Green New Deal, not for the "Green" part but for the "New Deal" part. Do single payer healthcare so employees can switch jobs for better pay w/o fear of losing insurance for a few months.

    It's frustrating because we know exactly how to stop all this and we just don't do it. And the same folks who say we shouldn't pick winners and losers will be on TV telling us why we need to bail out the losers next time. And we will to. We've done it every 10 years since I started paying attention, and I bet if I looked we did it before then.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Gearing up for recession by tomhath · · Score: 0, Troll

      The US economy is doing great, it's the EU that's dragging things down. Centrally managed economies always fail, and the Green New Deal would cause a Depression (not Recession).

    2. Re:Gearing up for recession by MouseR · · Score: 4, Informative

      I dont think this has anything to do with recession planning.

      Been in that company nearly 22 years and I've gone through (/survived) *many* restructuring operation (more than 10). It's never been about "surviving the next quarter". It's usually about optimisation of teams or product direction.

      I know people in the Montreal group that have been affected. Don't ask numbers, I dont have em. But I do know other people in that group that didn't get axed. One VP there has had his manager teams' constituents affected. Dont know where—we're spread out globally. (I work in a different group and my teams mates spread from California to London plus a couple more in India.)

      I'm not sure if there's a better way to handle things. I'm not even sure how they handled it in this case. But when our startup was acquired, they did the "everyone in this room still has a job" thing.

      THAT, was by far, the worse I have witnessed. And it was before the acquisition so it's not on Oracle.

      Obligatory "this is my opinion" thing and "I dont speak for Oracle".

    3. Re:Gearing up for recession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well done, you get your kool-aid today!

    4. Re:Gearing up for recession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's just too much money in it for the higher-ups. They get to cut the herd and divide it up for themselves. There's nothing else to it. Then they get to start looking good again, by starting hiring and expanding again until the next round. THE WINNER TAKES IT ALL!

      Captcha: killings

    5. Re:Gearing up for recession by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      They've had too much already.

    6. Re:Gearing up for recession by Can'tNot · · Score: 1

      Recession layoffs usually come after the recession has started, that way the company can use the recession as the excuse and they don't get the same negative PR.

    7. Re:Gearing up for recession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We could stop this easily. End buy backs. Increase regulatory oversight so that companies can't gamble on the ..."

      You and what army? HOHOHOHO ... that train has departed around 1980's and is not coming back. Remember how proud you were to stop those annoying unions and regulators - its the American way. Enjoy your deregulated shithole and may the best doggie win. If you can't handle it you are weakling - better vote for Trump or just do some drugs - drugs will cost you less hahaha.

      woof woof woof :)

      ps. say hello to your parasitic communist (yes, you bail them out constantly) "elites"

    8. Re:Gearing up for recession by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      The Green New Deal would cause famine and starvation that would rival what Stalin did.

    9. Re:Gearing up for recession by jpaine619 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Well done, you get your kool-aid today!

      Of course.. Your socialism is different/better than Stalin's or Mao's. Fuck you, we aren't falling for it..

    10. Re:Gearing up for recession by gtall · · Score: 2

      Well, we did know how to stop it back when we weren't in hock for $22 Trillion. Now, we've peed on seed corn and there is no help possible from the Fed. Government. Oh, and if a recession hits soon, expect that $22 Trillion to get much larger.

      Hmmm....I seem to recall a lot of bluster about the last tax cut paying for itself. I guess the American people were lied to one more time...and believed it one more time.

    11. Re:Gearing up for recession by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Do the Green New Deal, not for the "Green" part but for the "New Deal" part.

      Both are important. Global warming threatens jobs and infrastructure, which means it threatens the economy.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    12. Re:Gearing up for recession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not obligatory, nobody thinks you speak for Oracle just because you work there.

    13. Re:Gearing up for recession by bettodavis · · Score: 1

      Yeah, being part of a Fortune 100 company for some years, I can attest they do this regularly.

      Some times it is known beforehand and announced.

      Some other times the reaper scythe just comes and razes entire groups.

      Good companies tend no to do this without warning, but they still are slaves to the quarterly earnings balance spreadsheet.

    14. Re:Gearing up for recession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do the Green New Deal, not for the "Green" part but for the "New Deal" part. Do single payer healthcare so employees can switch jobs for better pay w/o fear of losing insurance for a few months.

      A recession leading up to the 2020 elections would provide just the sort of push needed to get these things done by handing the White House to a progressive woman president and electing a Senate prepared for drastic action to "end the recession". If big business is smart, they will do whatever they can to avoid causing a recession before 2020.

    15. Re:Gearing up for recession by jafac · · Score: 1

      ha.
      who will stop the buybacks?

      The bribed congressmen?

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    16. Re:Gearing up for recession by jafac · · Score: 1

      You sound strangely familliar. Like. . . who was that? 20007?

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    17. Re:Gearing up for recession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was a trucker/shipper calling into a radio show before the end of last year and he said that the volume of incoming products to ship is dropping fast. The brilliant Trade War is causing drought in materials coming in. The shipper said he may have to start letting staff go for lack of product to haul from the ports. No doubt the idiot in charge is doing his best to screw us, and enrich himself and his family.

    18. Re:Gearing up for recession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >It's frustrating because we know exactly how to stop all this and we just don't do it.

      Name one country that saw a recession coming and stopped it, without failing miserably like Venezuela.

    19. Re:Gearing up for recession by MouseR · · Score: 1

      Contractually, as per employee handbook, I'm legally required to do so. Common for large corporation. Even small ones should do this. It avoids one foul-mouthed employee to say things that could otherwise be construed as being a corporate direction.

  15. O*ne R*eal A*sshole C*alled L*arry E*llison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No he won't. Not only does that dude sleep soundly at night, he think's he is a great guy. People with narcissistic personality disorder actually believe that being an asshole is a good thing (as long as they are the asshole). That's why its a disorder and not just a point of view. They are biologically incapable of seeing it any other way.

  16. Two thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two thoughts:

    • I had a co-worker who at one point worked for a startup which was short on money and could not pay its employees. Oracle bought them out, and, to Oracle's credit, they did pay his back pay and then increased his salary.
    • According to one of the linked articles, Oracle doing layoffs is an annual ritual. Remind me not to work there.
    1. Re:Two thoughts by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      They were on the hook for the back pay anyhow. When you purchase a company you assume all of its liabilities and debts. The backpay was not optional.

  17. Disproprotionate Impact on American Citizens? by reporter · · Score: 2

    According to a report by USA Today, Oracle has a history of discriminating against job applicants who are American citizens. The managers prefer foreigners, whom the lawyers at Oracle help to get H-1B visas.

    We should scrutinize the layoff to determine whether American citizens are overrepresented among the terminated employees.

    1. Re: Disproprotionate Impact on American Citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Corporation using foreign slave labour ?

      That is because too many Americans do not support the Patriot Trump. They are too dumb to see through the internationalist big money propaganda.

    2. Re:Disproprotionate Impact on American Citizens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What said full time Oracle employees had to be just 'murkins? Fuck 'murka. Its a shithole.

  18. And telephone sanitizers by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    Maybe hairdressers will stay too.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  19. Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He should have been as boneheaded as the SUN folks and drive the whole company into bankruptcy, based on some useless "sharing" ideology.

    1. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sun's problems came long before their embrace of open-source. That was a hail-mary to save the company, not the cause of its demise.

  20. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because Ellison comes down hard on software thieves ?

    Use postgresql if you do not like Oracle's biz model.

  21. nobody gives a crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    unionizing is for pinko commie assholes - flexible work force is much better for the modern economy.
    ahahahahaha

  22. Been through 50% cuts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I worked on a contract that we'd had for 15+ yrs. Growing and shrinking as needed by the client. I was hired when only 6 people worked on it and the client had work for 22+. Due to the complexity of the work and specialized - nowhere-else-in-the-world - skills, it usually took 2 yrs to get someone new to any level of consistency or productivity. These jobs required DoD clearances.

    In the 6th year, the contract contracted. 2 groups were involved - the applications team and the simulator team. Both were being cut 50%. The prime contractor was also taking 50% of the cuts, which showed how close our partnership with them was.
      The new headcount in my group would be 11.

    Anyway, all 22 of us in the team were called to the meeting room where the boss's boss explained the situation and said that he wanted to know if any of us were looking to leave, were interested in other jobs inside the company (we'd just one a 500+ person contract with very different skills), retirement. If any of that was our situation, we should talk with him today. 11 people basically volunteered to leave. Nobody was forced out of our team. I left a few weeks later, after finding another job inside the company on that other contract. That move totally changed my life for the better.

    The simulator people weren't handled nearly as nicely. They were all called to the meeting room and the boss's boss wasn't there. She had made post-it notes and as she walked to the meeting, she up them up on their office doors like flags - "Come see me, M" Basically, everyone knew exactly who had been selected to leave just by the flags on the office doors. I've used this as a specific example of how NEVER to handle these situations. This manager wasn't a bad person, but just had few empathy skills.

    Sending an email for wild distribution is a dick move. The people involved are going to have their lives upended and deserve a 3 minute, person, chat.

  23. 30 minutes? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    Maybe I’m unusual (okay that’s a given, stop snickering), but - I have a fair bit of my own stuff at my work office, even if you exclude all the little work-related mementos I’ve accumulated over time. I don’t think it would be physically possible to clear it out and “return company assets” in anything close to 30 minutes.

    Heck, most of the time I take transit to and from work. I couldn’t carry all my stuff on transit, at least without some time to plan ahead.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re: 30 minutes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean you couldn't fit it all in the back of your Escort Wagon?

    2. Re:30 minutes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your risk.

      When the company that employed me shepherded us into cubicles, I reduced personal items to a minimum. No personal photos, for example. Cheap earplugs that I would not need elsewhere. TWo or three things I would not miss. Two or three valuable items shuttle to and from work in my bag.

      When the company shows you what you're worth to them, reciprocate. Don't grow deep roots.

  24. More work to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These people are still alive. Oracle left the job undone.

  25. Well yeah by rsilvergun · · Score: 0

    because Stalin and Mao weren't socialists, they were fascists.

    You do understand that people can misrepresent themselves, right? If not, I've got a Nigerian prince I can introduce you too. I'll just need a finders fee of a few dozen bit coins to an unregistered wallet...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Well yeah by Livius · · Score: 2

      You say that like fascism and socialism were incompatible. Fascists never pretended they were laissez-faire capitalists.

    2. Re:Well yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't like fascists you should hate the so called Democratic Socialists in the US today. They don't tolerate any dissent from their view of the way things should be, and they want to vastly reduce individual rights while controlling everyone and everything. In short - they are fascists (and socialists).

  26. Desperation move for Oracle Cloud by ErichTheRed · · Score: 1

    I've been in the IT business for over 20 years. No one remotely technical voluntarily does business with Oracle. The executives get sold on the dream by Oracle's sales force, but I have a feeling they're having a very hard time convincing companies to put even more of their eggs in the Oracle basket.

    The company I work for is a PeopleSoft customer and they operate in over 130 countries, so I'm sure it's nearly impossible to switch HR software without massive pain. I happen to know the people doing the license negotiation, and they were basically strong-armed into moving to Oracle Cloud hosting and accepting millions of dollars in "cloud credits" that they have no intention of using. This mirrors what I've heard from others as well -- Oracle is making it so expensive and painful to maintain on-premises licensing that it forces people running stuff like PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, Siebel and Oracle's own ERP product into hosted cloud stuff.

    Oracle seems to be incredibly desperate to become an AWS or Azure...but they don't seem to realize that only the execs are fooled anymore. Oracle Cloud is about as trustworthy as "Symantec Cloud" or "CA Cloud." This latest layoff just sounds like they're putting their foot down and saying every waking hour will be devoted to cloud, no more software packages. My company's doing something similar with DevOps these days...if your project doesn't have enough cloudy DevOps-y buzzwords and tools used, it's on the chopping block.

    1. Re:Desperation move for Oracle Cloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oracle Cloud is about as trustworthy as "Symantec Cloud" or "CA Cloud."

      It's not helping that their commercials have the same guy who's narrating the Curse of Oak Island.

    2. Re:Desperation move for Oracle Cloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (...) but I have a feeling they're having a very hard time convincing companies to put even more of their eggs in the Oracle basket.

      Oracle cloud is cheap. That's all. That's what gets you business.

      I would like never to go into business with Oracle, but they are the cheapest for compute heavy BM workloads. I can't even easily get those machines at AWS. It was out of my hands the moment I made the price comparison (info: this was about 64 core Epyc servers).

  27. It's just a federal jobs program by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    it won't cause famine any more than the last New Deal did. The "Green" part is just there to keep the Green party from spoiling another race.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:It's just a federal jobs program by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Green New Deal would eliminate large segments of the economy and replace them with welfare (aka UBI) for which there is no source of funding.

  28. Business jobs are not that bad a shot by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Business jobs: Bad shot at a VP job making high 6 figures.

    It seems to me like business jobs making low to high end six figures are not actually that hard to get, as long as you have the entry credentials.

    Now if they enjoy those jobs as much as tech workers, that I am not sure...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  29. The media fell in line lock and stock by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    for the last one. So I don't think they need to care. There won't be any bad PR because it's all pretty much the same corporate owned media whether it's Fox, MSNBC or CNN. There's a few lefty outlets talking about it (and Bernie and Warren, both of which have been bitching about it years, Bernie for decades) but you'd really have to go looking to find those.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  30. Cold, heartless, dying company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oracle is yesterday's business. No one wants to pay bazillions of dollars for a database anymore. Oracle couldn't make/buy a decent smartphone OS, so they sued Google instead. Oracle's cloud is getting badly beat by Amazon, Microsoft, and Google. But as badly as Oracle has run its business, the way they laid people off shows that Oracle management are dicks.

  31. Also the cuts were in their cloud services by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    which are doing very well for them, so they just fired a bunch of highly trained and useful people in a profitable product line.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Also the cuts were in their cloud services by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is the oracle cloud really doing well... theregister.co.uk seems to think otherwise....

  32. Java is Dead and Oracle Killed It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oracle doesn't respect engineers. Why would you want to cast your lot with Java when it's controlled by a colossal prick like Ellison, who is worse than Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer together on their worst days? Meanwhile, Microsoft has genuinely reformed under the leadership of Satya Nadella while Oracle remains unrepentant and committed to the bad old lock-in days of the 1980s and 1990s. Why not switch to an ecosystem where the engineer is acknowledged and respected? The consultation is free, switch today.

    1. Re: Java is Dead and Oracle Killed It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This.

    2. Re: Java is Dead and Oracle Killed It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And AWS kicks both their asses combined nearly by double.

  33. oracle layoff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Guess somone has to make up for all the companies dropping Java and oracle due to high license cost....

  34. You don't understand what Fascism is by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    so you're building up strawmen to attack me.

    Fascism is when all public institutions are brought under a single, centralized control. That's not just the economy. It's the Economy, Gov't, Religion, Schools, Hospitals, etc, etc.

    I'm not going to pretend I can explain it terribly well, so see here and also here. Look up Shaun on YouTube while you're at it.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:You don't understand what Fascism is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to Mussolini, fascism was a distinctly Italian movement and not for export. The term has become so adulterated it no longer has any clear, commonly accepted definition.

  35. March Madness 2019 Live Stream Online by March+Madness · · Score: 0

    This is an unbelievable site and I can not prescribe you guardians enough.March Madness 2019 Live

  36. You're projecting hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your response had nothing to do with the guy you're responding to... or even the guy before him.

    Look up Alex Jones. Your rambling about strawman right wingers is of the same sort he does in the opposite direction.

  37. How wonderful . . . by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    . . . these major corporations always show such warmth and loyalty to their productive employees. Brings tears to one's dry eyes . . .

  38. Check out Micron site, Manassas, VA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey!

    In the Micron halls in Manassas, VA, there's a post that Micron intends to hire an H1B Oracle specialist (as they are legally obliged to do). Perhaps one of the laid off Oracle specialists already in the US with work authorization (citizen, resident, etc.) could fill that role.

    Just sayin....

  39. Finally! by juancn · · Score: 1

    I've worked at Oracle Engineering (in the middleware division), and there was lot's of unnecessary and incompetent engineers. The deep pockets of the corporation reached a level where you had principal engineers who couldn't code. Some people would just close tickets as "implemented" and wait for QA to report a bug on it to actually implement it. That way metric were always fine. Everything is on time, managers look good. My guess is that this round of layoffs is not nearly enough.

  40. Federal 30 day notice of layoff if 100 or more??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what happened to the federal law on having to give 30 days notice if 100 or more people are laidoff?