#organization

The Young Professionals Association of Louisville will begin a leadership search. Executive Director Grace Huneck is stepping down. Her departure is planned for this spring. The organization seeks a new leader. This search aims to fill the Executive Director role.

https://www.bizjournals.com/louisville/news/2026/02/02/ypal-executive-director-stepping-down.html

Please share updates here. It's been incredibly hard to follow what's happening. Good luck to everyone.

I just got fired from Walmart.
I am looking for a stable organization with fringe benefits and a great salary.
I've worked as a cashier for 22 years and ready to make it up the corporate ladder.
What time should I send my application to?

I’ve received four separate inquiries from different parts of the organization asking whether I have any open positions. One came from HR—they emailed me saying the individual was identified as a top performer and asked me to review their résumé for potential fit. If I decline an interview, I have to provide a reason, and HR has pushed back on my explanations in the past.
Another inquiry came from a department I’ve partnered with on projects, another from a direct report advocating for a former colleague, and the last came from a Director who was saying goodbye. In her farewell message, she asked us to keep her and her team in mind and included a brief summary of the three employees who were impacted.
I’m on the UnitedHealthcare side, and I want to say this to you: don’t feel embarrassed to reach out to colleagues and share your résumé. My boss and I always prioritize candidates who have been laid off—I’ve hired many people this way. Most of us understand what you’re going through, because today it’s you, but tomorrow it could be any of us.
Wishing you all strength and momentum as you move forward. You’re capable, you’re resilient, and better opportunities are ahead.

Friday I know of at least 2 organizations that had surpluses! I know WFM has something boiling! Anyone have any detail!

Please prioritize completion of all remaining deliverables over the next few weeks so the associated revenue may be recognized on the February 11, 2026 earnings call.

Subsequent organizational changes and LR’s will be communicated separately.

I got an email saying “Org Update” for tomorrow morning. I think this is the end for me.

It’s happening as many people projected tomorrow AM and probably Wednesday also. Stop asking what organization and for all the details. People are sharing what they can without exposing themselves. Bottom line is a lot of us are receiving emails for meetings. We’re sharing what we know. But the cuts are continuing. The layoffs are happening in waves based on your leadership and org and it’s not over.

The whispers of worst case scenario are getting old.

There are so many directors, managers, sr leads. All just attending meetings and cruising?

They are once again letting go of tenured employees in good standing without providing any explanation, instead of allowing them to relocate within the organization. This is not in line with the HealthStream culture or vision!

https://www.cohenmilstein.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/First-Amend-Complaint-In-re-Nike-Securities-Litigation-2025-02-10.pdf

Stealing, kickbacks, forming a shadow organization. My question is, how much did he pay to get hired into EH? Or was he considered a perfect fit for this corrupt organization?

Hi folks,
Is there any news if EurAsia structure will continue? Any news on OLM and RLM structure? Recently lot of Eur-Asia LT changes.

So how do the layoffs which tool place 1 year ago look now as a strategic initiative ?

On December 23, 2024, AM Best wrote the following:

Mutual of America Financial Group is laying off employees as part of its focus on becoming a "more efficient, strategic and customer-focused organization."

Is it more efficient now ?
Is it more client focused ?
Is this all just smoke and mirrors ?

Will there be cuts?

I am in the PMR and have heard rumblings of “changes” in 2026. Anyone heard anything about what these may be?

More than ever, continuously updating skills is critical in today’s environment.

Organizations can survive leadership missteps and even recover from strategic errors, but when trust erodes at scale across the workforce, the damage runs much deeper and takes far longer to repair. At that point, uncertainty replaces alignment, and employees naturally begin to focus on self-preservation rather than long-term commitment.
When people no longer believe that decisions are transparent, fair, or in their best interest, engagement drops, collaboration suffers, and institutional loyalty weakens.

This is not a reflection of individual failure—it’s a predictable response to prolonged instability. In these moments, waiting for systems to correct themselves is risky.
That’s why taking ownership of your own growth has become essential. Investing in skills, adaptability, and relevance is no longer just about career advancement—it’s about resilience. Regardless of organizational outcomes, those who continue to learn, evolve, and stay market-ready are better positioned to navigate change, protect their careers, and create optionality for the future.

In uncertain environments, self-development isn’t selfish—it’s strategic.

Tend to agree. Putting this up for visibility. Found at @bb+1kd04e88w.

Remote employee- I requested my return package for my laptop and concession device the Monday after Thanksgiving- I just got an email today saying that 'they've approved my ticket, but there is currently a backlog due to a large number of requests with our vendor.' Then HR tells me that it could 'potentially' impact my severance payout if they don't receive it in time as I'll be gone until the 5th to visit family. Then this morning, we finally get some notification about Dan's 20 million dollar 'retraining' fund that he's been bragging about, and they still kick the can down the road saying that we'll get more details in the coming weeks. How can they layoff 13,000 people and not have prepared for this? Anyone else having these kind of issues?

Anyone hear that senior managers are targeted for January? What orgs and what criteria?

Heard a rumor that more big org changes are coming. Any details? My money is on BH as next COO.

Meeting invite today - just me and my boss with title "Org Update"

The technology departments at Fiserv are a total mess. They are packed with Indian folks grabbing all the high-level spots like CIOs/SVPs, and then those guys keep hiring more “H1B” visa holders from India for their teams instead of Americans. They are bending or breaking immigration rules to hang onto their preferred H1Bs for leadership jobs that any American could easily do. This goes against everything Trump’s pushing to make America great again. They will also file a green card for each of them and will keep requesting for extensions, misusing the h1b clause. USCIS should soon audit Fiserv workforce to make sure it is not letting the core payments processor of America misuse any laws.

“Win Now” assumes a stable foundation. Many here question whether the organization is repairable, and others note it has yet to stabilize. Since the comeback strategy began, repeated executive turnover and workforce reductions make the end state hard to understand.

When integrity feels absent, professionals have to anchor to personal values—knowing when to stay, help, or move on without bitterness. The harder question is why so many remain while clearly unhappy.

If anyone has firsthand layoff experience or concrete insight that could help others make informed career decisions, it would be valuable. Merry Christmas.

Friday afternoon brought the usual choreography. A polite email chain. A cake that looked like it came from the same vendor everyone uses when they want to appear thoughtful without actually being thoughtful. Handshakes, laughter that arrived a half second late, compliments delivered like obligations. Jennifer smiled the way people do when they are leaving a place they have already emotionally left behind months ago.

I remember thinking that the goodbyes were too smooth. Too clean. Like the floor had been swept already.

By Monday morning the layoffs started.

That is what made it feel cruel, not just business. The timing had the sharpness of intent. There was no breathing room between the farewell and the damage, no pause that might suggest humanity, only a clean cut that made it obvious someone had been waiting for the moment the gate swung open.

People talk about reorganizations as if they are weather. Something that happens above us. Something inevitable.

But this did not feel like weather. It felt like a decision.

Salim’s new structure was being sold as alignment, as simplification, as focus. The slogans were familiar. The language was polished. Yet the shape of it was unmistakable. Power was consolidating. Regional teams were being pulled into functions under Salim’s organization, a transfer presented as efficiency but experienced as control. In the hallways and in quiet chats between meetings, people didn’t call it a transition. They called it a takeover.

And the pattern of who benefited was obvious enough that it stopped being a rumor and started becoming something you could map.

The regional vice presidents were now clearly tied to Salim’s orbit. Soufiane ran Central West, and it was no secret that he and Salim were close. Not close in the way corporate leaders pretend to be close on stage. Close in the real way. Fifteen years of shared history, private conversations, vacations and dinners, familiarity so deep that it didn’t need to be explained. Their friendship did not stay outside the office. It lived in the room with them.

Bob ran Northeast South and had his own history with Salim, a relationship that had grown in Bellevue the way these things always grow. Proximity becoming trust, trust becoming access, access becoming protection. People called it networking. People who weren’t invited called it something else.

Under Salim’s umbrella, the functional leaders stood like pillars around him. Naveen led Field Engineering. Jon handled Field Operations and Resilience. Craig ran Customer and Stakeholder Engagement. Jeff drove Network Build Strategy and Execution. Pankaj owned Insights Enablement Strategy.

On paper it looked like a clean machine. In real life it felt like a court.

I had worked for Harlan for many years. Harlan was not a performer. He didn’t need a spotlight to be effective. He was one of those leaders who could walk into a problem and understand it from the inside out, not because he had read a summary but because he actually knew the work. He could speak in specifics and still respect the larger mission. He was demanding, sometimes exhausting, but his intelligence felt honest. It made you sharper. It made you better.

So when Harlan was replaced and Bob moved into the space he left behind, it hit me like a personal insult. Not because Bob was incompetent. Bob was fine. But fine was not the point. The point was that it didn’t feel earned. It felt selected.

It felt like the kind of choice that happens when the decision is already made before any interviews are scheduled. When the criteria is not performance or vision but belonging. Being inside the circle. Being the familiar face that doesn’t threaten the center.

That is what broke something in me. Not the change itself, but the reason underneath it.

Jeff was another kind of story. Jeff could talk. He had that smooth tone that made everything sound inevitable and exciting, like the future was a place he had already visited and you were lucky he came back to describe it. People laughed at his jokes even when they weren’t funny. People nodded while he spoke even when his points were thin. His confidence was persuasive, and that is what made him dangerous.

To me, Jeff lacked the ability to truly imagine the future of technology. He could repeat what was popular. He could package an idea. He could drive change with force. But too often the vetting was half cooked, the risks minimized, the unknowns waved away as if skepticism itself were a character flaw. He moved fast and demanded agreement, and when reality pushed back, the cost landed on everyone else.

Worse than that, he took disagreement personally.

If you challenged him, he didn’t argue like an engineer. He didn’t test the idea. He tested you. He smiled while he did it, as if he were being helpful, as if he admired your passion, and then he found quieter ways to punish you. Your name disappeared from a thread. Your project got reassigned. Your feedback became concerns about alignment. Your performance review suddenly included words like attitude and collaboration.

He didn’t have to raise his voice. He just had to decide you were inconvenient.

I remembered stories from Sprint, the ones people told when they thought nobody important could hear. How budgets were treated like personal allowances. Trips that were always justified as necessary. Dinners that were always framed as stakeholder building. Complaints delivered as if the organization existed to soothe him. And the constant sense that someone else would eventually be held responsible for whatever didn’t work.

Craig played a different game. Craig knew how to lean upward. He knew how to speak in the language leadership wanted to hear. He also knew how to keep his team in the shadows.

He didn’t protect them out of kindness. He protected them out of control. Visibility creates independent relationships. Visibility creates recognition. Visibility creates options.

Craig preferred to be the only bridge. Work traveled up through him and credit traveled back down as vague praise. He would take what you built and present it with his fingerprints on it, then later he would tell you privately how much he appreciated you, as if appreciation could substitute for acknowledgment.

That kind of leadership doesn’t just drain people. It teaches them to stop trying.

Then there were the ones everyone stopped defending.

Luis had earned his fall. Too much posturing, too little substance. Too many speeches, too few results. He always had a reason, always had a story, always had someone else to point at when the numbers didn’t match the claims. When the demotion came, nobody looked surprised. Some people looked relieved.

And John, who once said, back at Sprint, that he liked us, that we were good, that we just needed the right structure, had also been quick to blame Marcelo when things collapsed. Marcelo became the convenient name to carry the weight. The scapegoat that made failure feel explainable.

But Marcelo wasn’t here anymore. So I found myself asking a question I didn’t say out loud in meetings, a question that burned anyway. Now what. Now that you cannot blame him, what will you call it.

People were tired. Not the kind of tired that a weekend fixes. The kind of tired that gets into your bones after years of being told you are lucky to be here while you are worked past your limits, after watching friendships win promotions while competence gets cut, after realizing that loyalty only matters when it flows upward.

And the thing that hurt most was how normal everyone tried to make it sound.

They called it optimization. They called it efficiency. They called it the future.

But it felt like exploitation.

Work until you have nothing left, then watch the ones with the right relationships keep their seats while the rest of you are treated like a cost line. It makes you start thinking in ways you never planned to think. It makes you look at competitors you used to dismiss and feel a strange longing for basic dignity.

I found myself thinking I would rather pay more elsewhere if it meant being treated like a human being. I found myself imagining what it would look like to stop defending a brand that no longer defended its people.

By the end of that Monday, it wasn’t just the layoffs that changed the room. It was the clarity.

The organization had a new shape now, and it was obvious who it was built around. The rest of us were just expected to fit ourselves into the empty spaces.

Bandy the clown lectures us all about going faster in the last Town Hall. 5 months later we still don’t have a defined sales organization. It is not difficult to split a few accounts between team and then decide how manny sales peeps. Q1 2026 will just be another few months of uncertainty and disruption. Obviously going faster doesn’t apply to Bandy, JUG and whichever Lex monkey does the sales coverage.

Layoffs happening around the organization. Merry Christmas, you are out of a job in the worst economy, but our CEOs bonuses are going to be ah-mazing.

Anyone know if the CMO organization is affected?

Received email from Sanjiv, EMEA part of orgs above are safe.

Like the title says, some people in network have been given word that their 3rd shift that's impacted will know tonight, and dayshift will be told tomorrow.

Our group - not a whisper, besides what's in the news

Band 7 in both organizations

AD told his team Monday the organization would have a 20% cut on Thursday. Said he didn’t know who, but told the team to be prepared for what is coming.

I am a new employee via contract and 8 months in my observation has been WTF since month 3, when I really got the lay of the land. Beyond the share price decline and lost market value, the organization lacks unity and accountability. There are way too many mid level people actioning work who are not great at what they do or have been told by their boss that they are not accountable for keeping to a reasonable level of standards for collaboration across teams. I’ve seen senior people refuse to collaborate and throw their peers under the bus. I don’t know the history of the company’s decline/ drama but when I joined I had friend at Amazon, Chase and other solid places say it’s a great company- these are good friends BSers. I am curious if anyone here would like to share WTF happened or if it’s always been kind of a mess.

I don't understand the long emails. What is going on with the org?

Here's an scheme to detox Amazon:

1) Eject Andy and his entire S-team.
2) Close 80% of offices. Go remote first (i.e. remote like the Cloud).
3) Remove 70% of managers, keep the top 30% based on team feedback/metrics.
4) Get rid of LPs. Stop saying that it's day 1 - Amazon has operated since July 5, 1994 - i.e. at least day 11000 (for those that can count).
5) Get rid of Forte, PIP, and URA targets.
6) Modify the hiring process so that most talented candidates are actually hired! Actually look at/study their background.
7) Reassign ICs to teams where they will grow and perform well.
8) Make comp way more competitive (i.e. Meta, NVIDIA, Netflix) and with actual refreshers.
9) Stop supporting Republicans tyrants!

After the most recent planning town hall, I’ve never felt more unmotivated working for 3M. SVP of planning is woefully under-qualified to be leading this global organization. The future is NOT bright at 3M with him in charge.

I truly enjoy being part of this organization and want to continue contributing meaningfully. However, the current schedule has been very demanding. I completely understand that global collaboration requires flexibility, but calls that take place in the middle of the night have become difficult to maintain long-term. It’s starting to impact my balance and energy levels, and I’m concerned about sustainability. I’d appreciate the opportunity to discuss whether there’s a way to balance time zones while still supporting our objectives. If that is unreasonable, sign me up to be laid off.

This centralization will eventually fail. The centralized teams aren’t built from the BUs, and most of the people there lack the capability and experience to understand how things actually get executed in a business unit — let alone run a business. Many of them have stayed in the center since they were university hires and have never worked in a BU. They have no idea how to deal with real business realities or how to actually drive a project.

In the past, they could claim that they contributed significant impacts to multiple projects and BUs to justify their PSG levels. However, their actual contributions within the BUs were largely unverified — many BU results could have been delivered even without their involvement. As a result, their impact has been largely inflated.

What did you all think of Dave’s town hall yesterday? It was good overall, but still left some areas unclear. It’s interesting that some of the old DPA team members seem to have transitioned into stronger leadership roles instead of being impacted. I’m also not sure what the Tech Venturing and Innovation team actually delivers — based on my experience, they’ve created more disruption than value, yet manage to position their work as impactful. Their approach feels more suited for marketing than for a technology function. I’m surprised Dave is allowing this structure — his org already feels too top-heavy with overlapping roles. Hopefully, they’ll revisit the organization design soon.

We haven’t heard much from PG&A lately besides the new intranet “improvement”. Everyone I have met from that organization seems like they are 21 and have no idea what they’re doing. Have also heard how toxic and backstabbing the culture can be. Can someone help and tell me what they do all day besides gossip on campus all day?

Layoff today in JA org!