Do not think that it is all over yet. This is just the beginning. It can be a beginning either to a small recovery, or a beginning to your doom if you are not careful to help EM figure out the real cause of systematic failure.
Remember the real snakes are still there. Do not forget to keep on exposing all suker employee, supervisors and safety touting fake managers until they are fired.
@bed+18gmVlK5 They fudged safety sharing data is what you are saying?
Those who are talking about managers doing good work are seriously living under either a rock or a dream world. I suggest that you goto UIS.
Let me hand hold you and walk you to a few supervisors who have zero valuable contributions. We worked with few who fudged data all along and shameless as5 lickers. These guys couldn't add 2+2 correctly. Then have you checked that female arrogant snob function manager from RTD .. can't name the deviI function. She pushed for 700 safety sharings a month and supported people who fudged data so the snobs can claim victory and move to their next assignment. These are not exceptional cases, just examples of many, many more.
The type of house cleaning you are talking about only occurs through M&A or bankruptcy action. It has to reach that level of desperation and usually someone from outside with no ties to the way things are done or people.
Are you surprised by this? The company promotes those it thinks are doing a good job. We can argue how true that is. I think for example it wasn’t the low level employees who got us here but the highest levels of the company. I think board members and VPs should be fired personally. That being said I never expected the company to fire those it has promoted. It would take an outsider coming in with a clean house reset agenda.
If they laid off all of the managers up to VP and left just individual contributors would that equal 100? How would this flat org work? If former ICs were promoted to managers would they instantly become the ones who should be fired or would we be all good then?
So you will probably say all supervisors are brown nosers and should be fired not that they were good individual contributors who rose to supervisor positions. If you believe they are just brown nosers then ok. If you believe they were good then what was done makes sense. How about the number. Do you think 100 shouldn’t have been cut? All the comments about doing work that doesn’t matter on this board. If we stop doing that BS work do we need as many people?
They laid off over 100 geoscientists by day 2 and only one or two were managers. Unbelievable.
There is no accountability for these clowns.
Especially for the make-believe Executive Vice President.