Thread regarding Nike Inc. layoffs

Not a single VP

How can you lay off 1400 people and not lay off a single VP in the process. I think that exposes the true purpose of this layoff more than anything else.


by
| 11 views | | 8 replies (last April 29) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kqb9dqg3

8 replies (most recent on top)

They only layoff married VP’s

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @aq+1kqb9dqg3

VP’s are on an annual contract….their layoffs look way different. If Nike lays them off before the annual renewal, then they have to pay severance according to the contract….think “golden parachute “. If they don’t renew the contract….it’s a “retirement “.

VP bloodbath is coming….just wait for it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @af+1kqb9dqg3

VPs get cut in a different way. This allows the incoming VP to make decisions. These waves are all about Sr. directors, Directors and ICs.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ae+1kqb9dqg3

@a3 you clearly don’t know what laying off a VP looks like

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a7+1kqb9dqg3

VPs getting cut is what people posting here wanted. I doubt it was any major factor in the "plan". To me watching this was VPs (the few I pay attention to) executing cuts based on what advisors in their ear told them was best. Some fat was cut and low level leaders were, in a few cases replaced.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a6+1kqb9dqg3

So much for squashing the layers of VPs. Still as convoluted as ever

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a5+1kqb9dqg3

@a2 They weren't let go, they left on their own, before this started. Show me proof that a single VP was laid off

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a3+1kqb9dqg3

Uhh i do know MW a vp was let go. So wherever you are grabbing your data from is wrong.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a2+1kqb9dqg3

Post a reply

: