I considered Canva’s layoff package by comparing the recurring cost of retaining an employee with a one-time severance and healthcare expense. My post separates the decision to eliminate roles from the cultural consequences of how a company handles layoffs; the figures are estimates, and I did not provide detailed assumptions or supporting data.
I said Canva's layoff letter offered at least 6 months’ pay, a year of healthcare and the MacBooks.
My initial reaction to the package was: “if you can afford all that, why not just keep them?”
For my example, I used someone earning ₹30 lakh a year.
After adding benefits, equity, office space and management time, I estimated that the employee cost the company closer to ₹40 lakh each year.
I estimated that six months’ severance plus a year of health cover comes to roughly ₹16 lakh as a one-time cost.
I treated the laptop as already paid for: “The laptop? Already paid for.”
My estimate was that “The package pays for itself in about five months.”
I argued that moving people into other roles only works if those roles exist.
My explanation of the restructuring was exactly: “Canva is merging divisions and cutting management layers. It’s the roles that are going.”
I argued that the generosity “buys a calmer exit, a stronger brand for future hiring and trust from the people who stay.” I characterized it as practical rather than charitable.
My distinction was: “Layoffs are a cost decision. How you handle them is a culture decision.”
I asked, “Would a package like Canva’s change how you see a company that lays people off?”
I tagged the post with #layoffs, #startups, #canva, #costcutting and #jobs.