Managers’ discretion:
Favoritism, politics, certain groups protecting their own, accusations of discrimination, and human error.
“ACT”-based:
Arbitrary criteria, no manager input, laid off by a spreadsheet made by non-technical HR folk.
6 replies (most recent on top)
I was let go by the axe of ACT. It had a big impact on me for a long time. I am much better now after years with peace of mind and good health. Nevertheless, it leaves an indelible impression. I just came here to wish all of you impacted a better life. Intel pays for the cruelty they meted out to the employees who are let go. Karma leaves a stain and there is no escape route.
@a4 not true. ACT was based only on SSL reward and there was nothing managers could do to change it. It was a strict spreadsheet layoff. Managers had no say. There were no exceptions. They lost a lot of people who were "favorites", and nobody ever anticipated that would be used as layoff criteria. I remember BK 'gloating' that he wouldn't be able to see the names of the people 'impacted'. He just set the criteria.
To answer @OP's question (since nobody else did), in some ways ACT was actually the 'fairest' but at the same time was also the most random and definitely the most cruel. I still have PTSD about that week. I think the company lost trust of employees that week which it has never regained. It also exactly coincides with falling from #1 semiconductor on the planet to not even being in the top 10 nowadays. ACT was quite arguably the event which led to the current situation.
employee performance metrics vs employee salary cost. no brainer.
It’s never just an HR spreadsheet. It’s always political to some extent. They know who they want to cut. Metrics are just there to provide post-hoc justification in case anyone tries to lawyer up. Someone with bad metrics can be kept via favoritism, and cause can be invented for anyone with decent performance they want to dump.
In the current round, I know only single digit number of people who are impacted and none of them was surprising. However, there are people who should have been cut and have survived due being managers' favorites. During ACT, it was so haphazard, I was stunned when people who I was working with were let go because they were really good and passionate people. I could never trust Intel (or any corporation) after ACT experience.
From my personal experience, I prefer current round to ACT, though current round is not perfect either.
It is a good chance for the managers to remove people who do not obey the managements, who have different ideas, who is performing better than the manager (risk of replacing the manager), etc.
Managements do not care about technical, experience. They only care to clean it up o ensure their own positions.