As I assumed, ATT job cuts won’t lead to significantly lower costs. I just read an analysis about job cuts in a company that didn’t yield any significant results in overall cost cutting.
Here is an article if someone is interested: https://seekingalpha.com/article/4381550-t-job-cuts-to-nowhere
the workforce has been issued metrics and practices which are unnecessary and impracticle resulting in the inefficiencies. the seasoned help developed band aid workarounds that make the landscape look compliant from afar,all requiring more effort and energy than necessary but workable.The added cost comes from micromanaging managers who have no clue what they are mandating.A frustrating task for the technicians writing it off as ' the phone company way'
Only an malicious underperformer would call others underperformers. People with leadership and business intelligence skills would never say that.
I second that the only people that need to leave are the C-suites and complicit Board members.
They can go be happy somewhere else.
Someone said: "The company remains far less efficient than competitors. In other words, too many underperformers."
And they are all Presidents, SVPs, EVPs, and VPs. If you spend all your effort rattling on about the latest effort to be inclusive instead of working on saving the company you are an underperformer. There will be plenty of time to fix the company socially after the arterial gushing stops. We are in big trouble and we are way too top heavy. Until we cull the pseudo executive herd we will continue to gush from the money arteries. I know it's awkward down at the club but get rid of the real under performers.
They are cutting for appearances sake, think Wall Street. I was released about 2 years ago. The people that were let go were split. Some needed 2-4 years to hit 67 and retire . The other half, including myself all had 15-20 years service and all were top notch. Those close to retirement could have been allowed to stay a couple years more and they brought plenty of knowledge to the table. The others could have easily been moved to other areas as needed.
But it was never about cutting dead weight or a certain technology dieing off. It was and always has been about headcount reduction. This seems to make the stock market Gods happy.
They don't care whether it does or doesn't. My experience here has been that except for the rare exception, directors & above don't have a lot of respect for the people here who actually work for a living. All they see are a bunch of "mouths to feed" as Da Stank put it, and if you're not working 80 hours a week trying to join their club, you're worthless in their eyes.
You might be a successful over performer, but working in a backward, massive, nonsensical structure that stifles progress and change, you can only go so far. Internal charge back is out of control, just try to get something done, the outsourced system support groups will charge a fortune. They can yell innovation all they want, cost structure will bury any bright ideas.
"Under performers" is a very subjective assessment of a person's work, how can this be used to measure the strength of a whole company. It's the management that creates, and is supposed to "implement" the strategies for the people that do work. So it's more likely their role in carrying out the functions of the organization that should be considered!
The company remains far less efficient than competitors. In other words, too many underperformers.
Institutional investors are not impressed . They are expecting growth.
Remember what they were told by RS-JS-JD about these acquisitions.
I have held that position for years. Its chump change. They don't realize any savings for quite some time if any. Its marginal so the Stank, Donovan and McF went to quarter cuts to push volume . It offsets some incremental costs but they have tons of contractors now that are probably 50-70% utilized . Also , they are not factoring in brand damage and lost revenue . Instead of the Stank cut corporate culture the ethical and moral decision would have been a real offer . For example, add 5 pension points and severance. Make a good viable volunteer offer to leave. The irony is that the on going disaster and stench was created in large part by the current CEO
Yes, they cut heads deeply at the $50 - $125k salary range, and leave the folks making the real coin and one strategic blunder after another in place.
Yep cutting the wrong jobs. Incompetence