Thread regarding AT&T layoffs

So, this must mean no more layoffs?

With such great results there's no need to cut any more people right now, right?

by
| 2014 views | | 11 replies (last April 26, 2021) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1avsgGw0

11 replies (most recent on top)

In a open display of ignorance @1nxp bleated: "Layoffs should always be determined by work availability. Lack of work equals layoff. Everybody working should be directly or indirectly (such as payroll) contributing to the company making money. "

Of course the reality is that there is and has been far more than enough work to go around. The regular layoffs had nothing to do with the amount of work or the need of headcount. It was entirely due to incredible management blunders, adventurous acquisitions, delusional embrace of an overinflated dividend, stunningly poor products & services. In short, these layoffs happened because Stink and Randy are horrible managers who can't see because of their arrogance and ego.

Before the DTV acquisition it's been one spectacular failure after another: The failed T–Mobile merger (cost about $6Billion or so). The home security business. Directv. Directv Now. atttv. HBO Max. Add to that their unscrupulous wireless practices, a moribund uverse, and a fiber network that doesn't serve anyone.

This has nothing to do with the ebb and flow of business nor the reduced amount of work. It's all about a very long and well–documented string of truly astounding management failures going back 10+ years resulting in a colossal debt load.

Yet somehow Stink is still here making some $25 Million per year, and Randy is sucking down about $5M in annual retirement.

These layoffs are because top management failed. Period.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3htc+1avsgGw0

The Retail Operations Auditors were just surplused and outsourced!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3qjb+1avsgGw0

Yep, no more layoffs. Gonna be some hiring soon.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1fhh+1avsgGw0

Layoffs should always be determined by work availability. Lack of work equals layoff. Everybody working should be directly or indirectly (such as payroll) contributing to the company making money.

Whether lack of work is because of a result of loss of customers, or automation, the result is, some people aren't contribution to income. AT&T shouldn't be in the "make work" business just for the sake of keeping people employed. That's the Bernie plan, having people count acorns in the forest for $15/hr.

If someone is losing their job because it would up being outsourced or shipped overseas, then better rely on the provisions of your union contract for a remedy. Whoops – no union contract – well, that's on you.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1nxp+1avsgGw0

Ha!

By the way, @cqe+1avsgGw0, I just listened to that album yesterday.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lqn+1avsgGw0

The need of people to run the business is ALWAYS under consideration. You can be sure more to come from those dying businesses like landline.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tat+1avsgGw0

Given there are many low value add AT&T employees/positions and many areas have more employees than needed, layoffs should still be on the table. Make sense?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wii+1avsgGw0

dreamer nothing but a dreamer

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cqe+1avsgGw0

Would seem logical but that's not how Stankey makes decisions

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ypb+1avsgGw0

It costs a lot to make animated videos of yourself so they'll have to pay for those some way.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ygz+1avsgGw0

And yes, that's sarcasm and I know full well layoffs will proceed as usual.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @pzq+1avsgGw0

Post a reply

: