This is what happens when you decide to pay the lowest possible wages to new hires while expecting high-quality results. The fact is, if we paid more and got better candidates, we would need fewer workers. Instead, the management would rather hire people who don't care and will just do the bare minimum instead of hiring qualified people who will work hard because they want to build their careers. It is better to have five people who know what they're doing working hard than twice as many making low pay while doing the bare minimum and not caring about their work.
6 replies (most recent on top)
You are so close, keep going, you are almost there
Intel let go off some very good people. They enabled leaders who will go to conferences, those who write boastfully and arrogantly do PR campaign, those who extend their social tentacles, travel and build offshore sites or close them down when Enid’s blow one way or the other. They are reaping what they have sown.
In addition, the quota system hiring people not based on their experience but color of skin, ethnicity, and religion. This also happens within Intel when it comes to promotions and managerial positions.
The interview itself is shamefully poor as a selection process, onboarding is a disaster & zero interaction in terms of a structured training format.
The turnover rate of newhires in our Org is abysmal.
They all leave and (rightly) sour the company name future potential hires too.
The stagnation of the stock price for the recent 22 years is the real culprit.
It's a vicious (not virtuous) cycle..
We pay low because the talent isn’t so good. The best talent don’t want nor would come to Intel even for a fair salary.
Thus Intel doesn’t pay much because the people they hire aren’t very desirable or wanted. Econ1 the law of supply and demand. No demand for Intel new hires and thus the low salary!