Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

The truth is we all are easily replaced. The main concern should be how the layoffs are done.

If you are a G9, you can be replaced easily by a G8 so on and so forth.

So many of the people here are worried because they have become accustomed to Intel’s silver spoon. They are worried they will not be able to make it at a smaller company, where they will be more likely held accountable for results vs. all the warm and fuzzies they get at Intel and only have to work 20 hours a week.

The only concern should be the fairness of layoffs. No matter how you slice it we have been conditioned to think age, race and s-x will be a deciding factor.

We would be far happier if decisions were made that were objective. For example, area x has 4 people and area y has 4 people. Area x has minimal need on the horizon. Objective would be to layoff 2 employees in area X. What would be unacceptable is to fire two performing employees in area y and move 2 from x to y because they are someone you like personally or is DEI. This would only be acceptable if the employees let go had a performance issue.

No one wants to be chosen because managers say “oh look this person can actually make it outside of Intel”.

This is a fear more than half the company has. The only hope is they do this objectively. But history tell us …. don’t hold our breath.

by
| 3321 views | | 9 replies (last November 7, 2022) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1jyHosZD

9 replies (most recent on top)

Reality is that large swathes of Intel employees really only have one skill: working at Intel.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2rsl+1jyHosZD

The only guarantee is Intel will always lay off competent and productive people to protect political appointees, family members and caste loyalists.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1klj+1jyHosZD

some PEs are not competent, their good skill is lip work, build buddy relationship with directors and above, steal lower grade technical accomplishment for themselves. this is problem for Intel. Intel PE does not mean too much, they just grab money.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @pbu+1jyHosZD

Plenty of G8s can replace G9s. G9 IC use to mean they throw you more scope because you lack people skills to manage. The only other option is to stop giving you raises because you are at top of band.

I see the point about gaps. Intel use to start graduate degrees at grade 6, now they start them at 7. Basically they get what most of the experienced bunch had to work 4-5 years for. Grade 7s are just a cesspool now of inexperience.

During the hiring spree they also tried to incentivize a bunch of Microsoft and Google folks to come over at G9 even if they had G7/8 experience. Otherwise those folks wouldn’t even bat an eye.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fzt+1jyHosZD

Well if you have G8's. Many teams have gaps in talent at the middle, some due to the last layoff. They may replace your position easily, but not your talent and years of accrued knowledge and experience.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cbm+1jyHosZD

@kwp The irony there is this approach will drive more offshoring at a time the taxpayers are subsidizing the expansion. Weird.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @sra+1jyHosZD

I don't know if meritocracy is a driver for layoffs since we are trying to cut costs. So my guess is that getting rid of high salaries is probably a main driver and not necessarily meritocracy. IMO meritocracy matters more when handing out promotions and raises. Will be interesting to see how the suits execute all this!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kwp+1jyHosZD

@rkt rhetorical question I guess? It’s dead, Jim.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dnr+1jyHosZD

DEI? What happened to Intel culture of meritocracy?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rkt+1jyHosZD

Post a reply

: