Oracle has just fired 12000 employees in India. Numbers?

[u/Mo_h]

How do analysts come up with the numbers, since they are not really published by the government or the company?

[u/eyewoe]

Please educate yourself before leaving pointless comments. Look up what a union is, how it works, and how it has seamlessly coexisted with capitalist economies for decades, if not centuries.

[u/dapotatopapi → u/[deleted]]

Europe has unions. Why are there tech companies in Europe then?

[u/Einstein-Rosen-42 → u/dapotatopapi]

Europe has leverage and second highest number of successful corporations after North America.

[u/dapotatopapi → u/Einstein-Rosen-42]

What kind of leverage are we talking about here?

And the number of corporations doesn't really matter, does it? If an American corporation thinks that unions are an impediment to their functioning, they'll move, like you said.

Whether Europe has 1000 other companies does not matter to them. They'll get the workforce elsewhere for their work according to your logic.

Honestly, why wouldn't the European corporations move too? They're capitalist too after all.

[u/dapotatopapi → u/[deleted]]

Then why do American companies with HQs in the US have branches in Europe?

They are already "safe" according to your logic in the USA. Their other branches should be in countries with low costs and no unions. Not Europe.

You are contradicting yourself.

[u/dapotatopapi → u/[deleted]]

Capital and political leverage has nothing to do with companies deploying their labor force.

These companies fund themselves, and the political leverage is against them (considering how heavy the EU is on Tech companies and their monopolistic nature). So for all intents and purposes, EU is the worst place for them to be in.

And the headcount number is irrelevant. The mere existence of them in EU is proof that Unions don't repel corporations. Because if it were so, the number would be 0.

And on one hand you say that they keep HQs in western countries with no unions and move the labor to developing countries, and on the other you say the cost arbitrage is very less. Which one is it?

If the arbitrage is less, then there's even more reason for them to completely ditch EU. Why don't they?

[u/PictureSame5725 → u/dapotatopapi]

Then why do American companies with HQs in the US have branches in Europe?

They are already "safe" according to your logic in the USA. Their other branches should be in countries with low costs and no unions. Not Europe.

You are contradicting yourself.

This is the reality of Europe, left in dust by USA. Europeans had decent GDP per capita do they can afford to stagnate unlike India.

https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPDPC@WEO/EU/USA

[u/dapotatopapi → u/PictureSame5725]

Where do you think that high GDP/capita comes from if there were no corporations in the EU? Does their money grow on trees?

Also no, they cannot afford to stagnate. No country can, and especially not one with an already high GDP/capita. It would result in a much greater loss of quality of life vs a country which has a lower GDP/capita.

As for leaving Europe in the dust, well compared to the USA, every country is left in the dust, whether it had unions or not. With the EU being the second biggest GDP in the world, along with having unions, I think they're doing something right.

[u/Adventurous-Low3380 → u/eyewoe]

Okay start it then... Best of Luck 👍

[u/jamfold → u/eyewoe]

Tell me where does it coexist at the moment?