Thread regarding Staples Inc. layoffs

Layoffs of SAL's, Facilities AE/AC's, Business Development FSD's and BDE's, some FSD's, demotions of some RSD's all happened yesterday.

It's sad. Plain sad. Nothing more to add.

by
| 2872 views | | 11 replies (last June 20, 2018) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+TFZZ59w

11 replies (most recent on top)

Directors are a big fat waste of money. Chop these yoyo's out and watch what happens. Nothing but good would follow.

This is for sure....especially in SDS... Most are totally useless.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @6vem+TFZZ59w

Directors are a big fat waste of money. Chop these yoyo's out and watch what happens. Nothing but good would follow.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @6xdp+TFZZ59w

There was so much useless chaff in mid to upper management when I worked there about a year ago. Staples can save a pretty penny by starting there.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ufm+TFZZ59w

Who did the layoffs ?? Anyone know a team call staples security ?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jie+TFZZ59w

What regions were affected? NYC tristate, CA?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gih+TFZZ59w

Spot on @TFZZ59w-uad

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @nye+TFZZ59w

Here's the thing. This is the ONLY way for SP to make money. Revenue isn't going up, so expenses need to come down, that's the only strategy. It's just math. They will sell all or part of Staples to someone else within a year or two. In order to make a profit, they need to raise revenue and reduce expense.

People are super expensive. Happy / Sad / Overworked, they're expensive. They're going to keep cutting people until the numbers work & they have a tidy enough package to sell for a profit. This isn't fear mongering or trolling, it's just math.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @uad+TFZZ59w

Cutting sales jobs is an ugly leading indicator.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rks+TFZZ59w

These layoffs were necessary if there is any hope of turning the company around. Sad nonetheless.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kri+TFZZ59w

These layoffs are indeed random. Sycamore's doing random layoffs to avoid discrimination claims.

Imagine them laying off too many older employees, or too many minorities... and they can't lay off, say, the bottom 10% because metrics can't be used in a layoff.

Geographics aid in the randomization of the layoffs, though.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @btz+TFZZ59w

Yes, these changes are very sad. Especially when top performers were let go. People who consistently were above quota and hit metrics were laid off while people who didn’t hit quota got to keep their jobs. Not in every case but in some situations. Can someone explain what criteria was used to determine who would stay vs who would be let go? What criteria will be used moving forward? It would be helpful to understand as it seems quite random.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @unm+TFZZ59w

Post a reply

: