‘No Job Security, No Safety Net!’ Startup Founder Compares Layoffs In India & US—Here’s What People Say

Amazon's recent decision to lay off 14,000 managers has sparked a major debate online after Wisdom Hatch founder Akshat Shrivastava criticised the tech giant's approach.

Shrivastava, in a social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, pointed out that Amazon now has over $100 billion in cash reserves-the highest in its history-yet chose to cut jobs instead of using its wealth to support employees.

"This is crazy wealth," he wrote, adding that Amazon could invest in bonds at a 5 per cent interest rate and earn $5 billion. He argued that the company could have used a small portion of these earnings to pay each affected employee $350,000 and still maintain its cash reserves. "But they won't do any of that," he said.

His post quickly went viral, with social media users sharing mixed opinions. Many agreed with his criticism, questioning why a company with such massive resources would prioritise cost-cutting over employee welfare. "Corporations will always choose profits over people," one user wrote.

Others defended Amazon's decision, saying businesses need to stay competitive. "Companies don't exist to provide lifelong jobs. If they don't cut costs, they won't survive," another comment read.

Shrivastava also highlighted a global issue, saying that big companies often benefit from tax breaks even after mass layoffs. He compared job security in the US and India, noting that American workers at least have some level of social security, while in India, losing a job could mean financial ruin.

Many Indian professionals echoed his concerns, with some saying they focus on personal wealth and opportunities abroad due to a lack of safety nets. "No one is there to save you," Shrivastava said, a statement that resonated with many online.

Amazon Defends Layoffs

According to a Business Standard report, Amazon CEO Andy Jassy has defended the job cuts, saying they are part of a broader plan to improve efficiency. He explained that reducing middle-management roles would help the company work faster and avoid unnecessary bureaucracy.

Jassy told Bloomberg, "You add a lot of people and you end up with a lot of middle managers. And those middle managers, all well-intended, want to put their fingerprint on everything."

Amazon is not alone in this shift. Other tech giants, including Meta and Google, have also reduced middle-management positions in an effort to stay agile and competitive.

As the debate continues, Shrivastava's post has reignited discussions on corporate responsibility, worker rights, and the growing gap between company profits and employee welfare.