http://www.oregonlive.com/silicon-forest/index.ssf/2016/06/intel_layoffs_skew_older_spotl.html
People over 40 were two-and-a-half times more likely to lose their jobs in this spring's layoffs than Intel employees under 40, according to data Intel provided to employees in compliance with the federal Older Workers Benefit Protection Act and obtained by The Oregonian/OregonLive.
For an engineering career, this is what I see ...The more experience I get the less valuable I am. So, I am changing my career now, while I can. All high tech companies are more interested in hiring an H1B visa to replace you. So, you are screw just because you are a US citizen with an engineering degree. Maybe a defense contractor company is safer, I don't think they can hire H1B workers because of secret clearance requirement. Either that or change your career to something ... the more experience you gain the more valuable you are.
Tired of working hard without strategic direction. Vision and planning at Intel are lousy. All hard work goes to waste and since the focal depends on your manager, and he/she gets a bad review you are screwed. There is no way to be successful. Managers are clueless with no idea on the technology. Below is one more example that shows how pervasive this problem is:
.....
By Motley Fool:
Who Will Buy Intel Corporation's $1,700 Desktop CPUs?
Intel launches 10-core CPUs for desktops, but will anyone buy one? Who needs one?
Intel claims those specs make it twice as fast as its top-tier quad-core i7 6700K for 3D rendering and 65% faster at editing 4K video. But customers will pay a lot for that performance boost -- the 10-core i7-6950X will cost a whopping $1,723, roughly five times the price of the i7 6700K. So who is Intel actually targeting with such a pricey processor?
.....
Speed is twice but cost is five times, only innovation comes from packing more cpus. This is today's Intel innovation. Good luck to does that are staying.
LOL, for intel to be a competitive in commodity like 3DNAND, drones, modems it would need to cut another 20-30% of the cost and head count. FIgure intel needs to be about 65k employees for 55 billion revenue, and about 2-3 billion profit. When ARM gets into server in about 2 years, and PC sales fall below 175 million ( yes 175 million, PC replacement going longer and longer 6-7 years not going to be uncommon as we store everything on the cloud, have SSD that never fail and use are phone more and more ), the die is cast, perhaps it wouldn't matter if we had a genius from MIT, Stanford, Harvard instead of a intellectually challenged SJ State BS running the show.
intel....not the next google
intel has become a commodity company, unfortunately their innovation is stale...robots, drones, and iot thingys are not the next big thing...
-chk
Their turn is coming.
It's going to be even worse for them since Moore's Law is just about over. I seriously think that in 15+ years Silicon Valley will become like the rust belt.
We had the benefit of a Moore's law tailwind.
They won't.
@HJjgj0y-chk. - You could not have said it any better.
The proof will be in the pudding: Let's see if Intel improves efficiency and velocity of execution with a new crop of young employees!
My experienced friends, please ignore the younglings. Why would you expect them to know what they are talking about, or who they are talking to? These are basically the same snot-nosed kiddos you work with daily on your teams who couldn't problem-solve their way out of a wet paper bag. They show you respect in person, but somehow with anonymity they become keyboard warriors. They do not realize and cannot understand the extent to which they are about to be in over their heads. They have not solved hundreds of difficult problems; been thru multiple business cycles; been put on the spot to save the day many times. All they know is what their professor told them in 101; their unfounded confidence is based on the superficial toy problems they solved with the training wheels on in college.
This reminds me of a recent problem my team faced. I've seen this many times over the years, and I'm sure you have too. The data wasn't matching our expectations for a project we were working on, so a large team (~15 people) was formed to get to the bottom of it. We locked ourselves in a conference room. I listened patiently for 3 or 4 hours and the others went on and on about what the problem might be. Eventually, I asked to be excused to look at the data in private. When I returned in about 2 hours, I knew exactly what the problem was and the solution as well. I returned to find that the rest of the team had come up with an "action plan" to execute over the next few months to continue investigating the problem. Of course, they were way off in terms of what the problem actually was. I told them what we needed to do, and that was pretty much that. No need for 15 people to waste time for 2 months spinning our wheels.
That is the value of experience folks. Talk all you want about new blood and new skills... there is no substitute for experience. Enjoy your action plans, wasted time and wheel spinning. You get what you pay for.
What a dumbass: "No business owner should be required to pay more to keep someone on their payroll just because they have had the opportunity to work and make a lot of money and benefits for a long time."
Wrong, Sh*t for brains. Its called AGE DISCRIMINATION. For the good of society as a whole, it is illegal to terminate older employees simply because of their age. Are you willing to be fired when you turn 45 because you are older? I'll bet 45 or 55 or 65 seems a long way off. It isn't. You will get old, or you will die young. Take your pick, asshat.
Its funny how the young are so ready to bash the old, saying they are tired and worn out or have no good ideas. I'm not going to bother to argue against those ideas, they are wrong and provably so.
The real reason companies like to get rid of older employees is WE COST MORE in salary and benefits. But us older employees didn't just reach their hands into the cookie jar and TAKE money, we were freely given it by Intel each year at focal for our contributions during the PRIOR YEAR.
One day, you "kids" that think the old people just need to get the hell out will be one of those old people yourself. And I 100% promise that you will see the error of your ways, the stupidity of your youthful attitude, and how your years of experience make you extremely valuable and worth every penny you are paid. And then one day, to company to which you gave so much and thought you had a future with will try to throw you out on your assduring what should be your peak earning years, and I promise you that you aren't going to be happy about it.
You will have kids in college, a mortgage to pay, and chances are you won't be ready for retirement. Perhaps in a few more years, but not now, now in your 40's or 50's. Even though you saw Intel do it to us, you won't see it coming until its your turn.
I hope I'm still alive to make you eat your words, to see you admit that you were wrong about us, just like like Intel or your other future employer is going to be wrong about you.
SSL4 meant getting ISPed
Grade 6 and lower don't qualify for SSL4
Grade 6 and lower are more likely to be younger
Anyone know the numbers for number of Grade 6 vs Grade 7 vs ... that got ISP?
Tagging it #agediscrimination
older workers got shafted
http://www.oregonlive.com/silicon-forest/index.ssf/2016/06/intel_layoffs_skew_older_spotl.html
People over 40 were two-and-a-half times more likely to lose their jobs in this spring's layoffs than Intel employees under 40, according to data Intel provided to employees in compliance with the federal Older Workers Benefit Protection Act and obtained by The Oregonian/OregonLive.
I'm no genius, but how about we revitalize Intel starting with the CEO? After all, the CEO and his band of locusts consume and deplete Intel at a rate of millions of dollars a year.
"We don't need those useless old folks in our lives or businesses!"
In retrospect, yes, I remember youthful arrogance. :)
For those that believe the only way for Intel or any company to survive needs to sacrifice experience. Hopefully, this will stop the BS on this board.
"The largest mass of great innovations in knowledge came in an inventor's 30s (42%), but a substantial amount also came during their 40s (30%), and some (14%) came beyond the age of 50. Curiously, Jones found that the average age of innovators is rising." Dec 2, 2011
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-innovations/the-case-for-old-entrepreneurs/2011/12/02/gIQAulJ3KO_story.html
Older worker thought, after you add in benefits and such an older work with his wisdom and experience of not trying to do the same stupid thing again and again, or how to do a thing faster over some young 20' something RCG is priceless.
I brought in a ton of PhD RCGs, sorry the don't know $hit and I have to teach them, do you know how many times I have to tell them did you look at this, did you look at that, and 5 hours later they do it, then I asked did you also check this and this and this. My older more "experienced" just get it the first time, how much is that worth to a company that is late and lagging on 14nm, and dead in the water on 10nm, LOL
What a fckn stupid statement..
Giving up on some old folks will leave more room for he vital young blood that can fuel the future growth.
Who here thinks it makes any sense to listen to someone with no experience? Think of any thing in life where experience does not count?
Intel was built by 3 men who had experience not 3 young guys who didn't know s..t
It really is about good business decisions. Your older worker is going to cost much more to deliver a service, of which is not delivered with new or fresh innovation or ideas, and at a ripened age, is higher risk to keep on a payroll. No business owner should be required to pay more to keep someone on their payroll just because they have had the opportunity to work and make a lot of money and benefits for a long time.
OP ... by "shafted" do you mean victimized by a corporation that doesn't value years of knowledge and experience? If so, maybe real the loser/victim in this game isn't those over 40 who lost heir jobs. Just a thought from an "unwanted elder" :)
A ship engine failed, no one could fix it. Then they brought in a man with 40 yrs. on the job. He inspected the engine carefully, top to bottom. After looking things over, the guy reached into his bag and pulled out a small hammer. He gently tapped something. Instantly, the engine lurched into life. The engine was fixed! 7 Days later the owners got his bill for 10k. 'What?!' the owners said 'You hardly did anything. Send us an itemized bill. ” the reply simply said Tapping with a hammer. $2 Knowing where to tap? $9,998 Don't Ever Underestimate Experience.
This firing of older workers is what I call an 'economic execution'. It may be good in the short-term for a company, but the ramifications longer-term are huuuuge (as Donald would say). If we take these worker out of service during their peak earning years, we are going end up paying for them one way or another.
Not sure of how to incentivize companies to retain older workers, but one idea might be to provide tax incentives where companies could deduct 2X the salary of someone over 45. Strange world we live where someone over 45 is over the hill, especially with the general expectation that people will need to work longer before retiring.
By looking at the complete picture of the intel employee demography. Intel is aging. Giving up on some old folks will leave more room for he vital young blood that can fuel the future growth. I think the path how it conducts this is wrong. It should lay off some of the old manager first, bring some young people in the management position, then I can see the company turns around. Getting rid of old workers while keeping older manager(who knows no new tricks) would not help. The company's future will depend on it can cure itself by taking drastic step to remove the aging management who was in position but have no idea where the company should move forward to.