Looking at who was let go, I saw some patterns and it was hard for me to see this:
A smaller group of people in critical roles were also let go. This is just my theory and my opinion: They either had a salary hard to justify for what they do, or were hard to work with (or both)
@a6 I wonder what the percentage of white men are to the rest of the org. Maybe, just maybe, there were more numbers of them so clearly more would be laid off.
@a6 Funny how you pretend like you know who all was laid off, could it be you are just trying to push your white victim agenda? Nah, couldn't be that. Easy to tell by the list of names, you aren't even close to being right
I've looked into a few of the "surprise" inclusions in the layoffs, and several of them were actually planning on leaving already, so I wouldn't be surprised if Nike new this and included them as a solid
Define "hard to work with." I know of some people let go in the current and previous restructuring because they weren't "yes" men willing to do whatever the VP tell them to do.
@a5 to your point, the lesson is, don't be a pain in the a-s to work with. This is controllable
@a6 very good point. I'd like to see the investigation on ITC migration
In light of the EEOC investigation into nike's discrimination against white male's it is interesting how almost all of those laid off in technology at WHQ were white males. You would think with the EEOC investigation at Nike they would be more discreet.
OP: Your post is purely speculative.
I did not get laid off but I assure one thing:
Plenty of immense talents have been laid off just for one reason: Failure of management.
Now, we can all speculate for the "Why" and the "Who"....but that's totally useless.
There are facts....repeated laid off is not good for a company and for the people.