Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

thieh t1_j6ijtf6 wrote

Remind me how cutting jobs drive safety.

82

YeaISeddit t1_j6ixuje wrote

Safety of their products. In the article (yes I read articles like a loser) it is written that they want to focus their resources on fewer products so that each project gets more resources and is less likely to experience safety problems.

9

Bierbart12 t1_j6ikube wrote

Less workers to file a potential lawsuit against the company

6

skilliard7 t1_j6jaedp wrote

>To improve profitability while investing in safety, innovations will be targeted at "fewer, better resourced, and more impactful projects", Jakobs said.

Any time you make changes to an existing product, there are risks that it could introduce a defect with safety rammifications. So by limiting the number of changes to their product,(by axeing projects), it reduces the amount of opportunities for dangerous defects to be introduced.

3

thieh t1_j6jazuj wrote

Apparently they don't believe that FTE is a resource. Just redirect existing people to fewer projects so they have "Resources".

2

skilliard7 t1_j6jbop4 wrote

The problem is they also need to reduce costs in order to break even. They lost 1.33 Billion Euros last quarter. So some FTEs do need to be laid off to ensure that the company is sustainable.

They are cutting many products and reassigning people to fewer projects, as you suggested. It's just that layoffs are also happening.

1

yaosio t1_j6kvik2 wrote

By cutting labor it increases the safety of massive bonuses for do nothing executives.

2

release_the_krakin t1_j6lce26 wrote

These execs aren’t even trying now

The good thing is that this bullshit won’t work

1

Curi0usClown t1_j6m7530 wrote

don't need to make a report if nobody was there to see the accident.

1

DMoney159 t1_j6ilhiz wrote

"Philips to cut 13% of jobs because everybody else is doing it"

30

Legitimate_Plum9 t1_j6jzsok wrote

Phillips actually had a huge recall of a sleep apnea product that could have killed people…. Major fuck up, not another case of a tech laying people off despite being highly profitable.

13

skilliard7 t1_j6jajxs wrote

It's not just because everyone is doing it, it's because the economy is in recession. Companies need to cut back to address macroeconomic risks.

−15

JPMoney81 t1_j6jiwb2 wrote

and to post higher profits so the shareholders can amass more wealth!

12

skilliard7 t1_j6jt2fo wrote

Philips stock is down 70% in the past 2 years.... their stock was worth more in 1997 than it is today. How much do you expect shareholders to lose just to maintain jobs that aren't providing more value than they cost?

3

JPMoney81 t1_j6k9i4o wrote

Philips' CEO's salary for 2023 is 6.7million USD. I can see another way to improve the company's financial situation.

2

skilliard7 t1_j6kbsxa wrote

Philips lost $1.3 Billion USD last quarter. The CEO's salary is a drop in the bucket compared to how much they need to cut.

3

JPMoney81 t1_j6kfc9b wrote

Would be a start.

2

skilliard7 t1_j6kfhwa wrote

$6.7 Million isn't exactly competitive for a CEO of a company of that size. If they cut their salary to $3 Million, the CEO will likely find a job elsewhere, and they'll end up needing to pay several times more to find someone qualified to run the company.

4

ISAMU13 t1_j6mxuk6 wrote

Won't work for $3 million?

I guess "Nobody wants to work anymore." /s

1

skilliard7 t1_j6n19be wrote

The CEO will work, just for another company willing to pay a more competitive rate

1

ISAMU13 t1_j6n9nyd wrote

How is he gonna get a more competitive rate when fucked up the last company? Why reward mediocrity?

He is no Satya Nadella.

1

Nasmix t1_j6jwj1c wrote

Technically we are not in a recession - a slowing economy yes, but not recessionary - at least not as of now

2

skilliard7 t1_j6jyn5h wrote

Nearly half of 2022's GDP gains were from increased inventories- stuff is getting produced, but not sold. It's a very strong leading indicator for an upcoming recession among many others.

−6

Nasmix t1_j6jz3nn wrote

Ok sure - however it’s more appropriate to say companies are reacting to a slower economy / lower demand than a recession

We likely will enter a recession though that remains to be seen

4

Prestigious_Carpet29 t1_j6jk01l wrote

Having worked for Philips in the past, I think it's clear they have been in "managed decline" for at least two decades, probably at least three.

They've reduced the breath of what they do, and sold off ever more pieces (NXP, lighting...) ...

15

Prestigious_Carpet29 t1_j6ke26i wrote

They've been increasingly just trying to jump on bandwagons, rather than seek long-term innovation.

Also >15 years ago they said their target market was over-50's.

Will their target-market eventually die out?!

4

djcarpentier t1_j6ls2cb wrote

How does cutting jobs increase safety?

4

GreenPlasticWaterCan t1_j6lpz9j wrote

Philips, a company destroyed for the short term pursuit of "shareholder value" and bonuses for leadership.

3

CenlTheFennel t1_j6lgoum wrote

This is in that CPAP department that killed a bunch of people? No? Oh okay…

1

Sea-Photo5230 t1_j6n1byw wrote

Philips is returning back to its core business that is only hardware or medical devices. They have had a tough time selling software/informatics solutions.

1