I think the problem are not the cuts, because Intel needs a major reduction in headcount. The problem is that pretenders, incompetents and slackers are not the ones getting cut, instead they are cutting the best employees we have. I think it will be too late when this leadership realizes that they made a big mistake by demoralizing and cutting the best employees, thus letting them go to the competition.
13 replies (most recent on top)
Tis true. Those incompetent will layoff any deemed threat
It has started. Though your point is valid - how do we know they are the best employees?
Here is the deal - programs and groups are getting cut. This means all types of people - high performing, mid performing, and low performing employees will lose their jobs.
If you have time here to complain about low performing employees, or slackers, you’ve got time to prepare to land elsewhere. Been here over 25 years - through multiple actions. Those who lost their jobs always landed in positions better for them and their families. My friends who’ve wanted to come back after being laid off missed the people - the high performing teams, the innovative thinking and products they were a part of.
Be well.
I left Intel years ago...there are quite a few options out there for anyone with a good background in their fields..and most importantly, the PAY and BONUSES outside of Intel are very competitive.
Why in the *** are all you people STILL at INTEL after complaining so much? I 100% agree with most people here, the work culture is toxic, favoritism is rampant, you have to carry others work loads and pay is very unfair between peers....so I just left. Are you all masochists??
I don’t see that, the first group let go was entire teams including mangers, it seems to me they are targeting specific groups who are their function eliminated or at least is not inline with future strategy
OP is spot-on, that was exactly what happened in ACT2016, those that were not manager's favorites were eliminated, nothing to do with performance or needs of the company. I know some were given ISP even after they moved to another group, because the elimination criterion was based on the FOCAL result the year before, and the managers had no interest to give them a proper stock option after they departed.
I'm not at Intel anymore but these threads are funny. The people that have time to comment and complain about Intel here during work hour are the ones complaining about others not pulling their weight at work. These threads likely aren't even posted by people working at Intel. It's the same complaint without substance over and over.
May be the problem is how Intel defines a best employee. There has to be a direct correlation to work, type of work, end product and profitability. If a company can’t establish that they shouldn’t be doing business.
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Given enough time it will be you.
Finally a sane thread. YES.
Aleast some of the slackers are very clear. We all know. They come into meetings. Talk stuff at way high level (where they wont even be able to make any realistic impact), just keep crying about issues rather than doing something to solve them. When we are in meetings we all recognize these folks and realize that they dont contribute enough. I hope in the unfortunate event of layoffs, such folks are identified and let go at a higher efficiency.
Intel can easily lose 10% of work force and still be ok. Might as well move faster.
best political employee wins.
This happened for all past layoffs. Due to that ratio of good employees contributing to work goes down after each layoff.
"instead they are cutting the best employees"
It hasn't even started yet! How on earth do you know that?
Exactly so!!!!!