It's obvious that performance wasn't criteria for this round, so I'm wondering what was. Judging by the ages of those affected, I'm guessing pay played a significant role in determining who to put on the list. I could be wrong, though, and it could be something else entirely.
13 replies (most recent on top)
The names I’m seeing, age factors in for sure, but it’s really cost. Remove 5 low paid or 2 higher, senior guys. Each org and team has done it slightly differently.. also depends if you org knows what you do and what you contributed. That’s not always the fault of the individual, there’s some really poor managers
I know of two people let go in APAC. One a top performer.
My understanding of the reason is that it was purely fiscally motivated. Every department was asked to cut back on cost. The reason why some departments had more people impact than others is that the cost reduction was absorbed in other ways.
I'm sure it was a little bit of both.
Some terrible performers.
Some expensive and not-good performers.
Some really expensive good performers (but not great).
THe reasons could be many ; talk say dir ppl in Eng were under investigation for work mobbing/harassment and were impacted by layoff . Can’t be sure if that was the exact reason but may have been contributor . Reasons are wide ranging across the impacted ppl.
@a5 what type of group? sales, dev? Other…
@ay not performance based at all in my org. I believe it was remote employees versus those in-office as they try to get everyone back to the office. But, they couldn't give a reason for why I was chosen, only that "this came from higher up" so clearly an agenda of some type in play.
It was primarily based on budget. Every org was over budget and that was the main focus. Also performance could be a factor, but mainly budget.
Most of the folks with age 50+ were affected in my org.
It was based on stack rank. You could be at the bottom, maybe you were a bad performer or the manager/skip did not like you or know what you were doing
Anecdotally, no. I know of people less than a year, to four years, to much higher.
Mostly performance based and in my org.
11 in my group. they were all over the payscale. so, id say no