Looks like a decent sized one at the end of May. I was asked for 2 names today. I have a peer in another old Tesmer team that had to give some too. Seems like it might be pretty good sized.
18 replies (most recent on top)
@ba While I appreciate your participating in this forum I'll point out each of your points can be questioned. Anyone who has paid attention for the last decade with apps like YouTube, Google, Twitter, FB etc. will recognize how an algorithm can be biased towards whatever you would like it to be. An algorithm being used could also point towards allowing them to zero in on certain specifics like salary or age. It could also be like you said but knowing about all of the shady and potentially illegal things the company has been associated with over time would lead me to be surprised if they were not using the algorithm deceptively. An "anonymized list of ages" that no one can verify essentially equates to a "trust me bro" sheet of paper. It's useless.
I'll give you an actual example of this type of list being deceptively used. The company I worked for which was acquired by Optum wanted to make themselves look better prior to the acquisition and laid off a group of employees. It was a group of 25. The list would have been all over 45 with the majority over 50. Prior to this there was a 32 year old trying to put her two weeks notice in. The manager asked her to wait so he could add her to this list. You could say it was a favor to her to get a semblance of a severance but it allowed them to have one person under 45 on their list. This company had a real mix of ages. Over half of the company was under 40. Didn't see that mix represented in the layoff.
@xq the good ones leave
@r3 age should not at all be a criteria for sure but in my 5 years of experience here, a lot of older ones are not doing anything except attend meetings and workshops. I know because I am one of them!!! 😂 There are some good ones too of course.
@r3 lots of conflicting data. Thanks for sharing your experience
Everyone let go between Feb and March were under 50 in my dept. around 10 ppl total gone. Most had little toddlers or jus came back from maternity leave. do you know who was left? 1 person under 50, and everyone else around aged 50+. I don’t think they care about age when it comes to cuts.
@ba everyone on my list including me were over 50. The one who didn’t get let go was 39. The ageism was glaring.
@ew "You already said that." - Chuck Norris
30% cuts across the board May 28th
@af completely false
You mentioned “old Tesmer Teams”… so would those now be under Jamie Burnett?
@aq if you are over 40 and get laid off they include an anonymized list of ages of all those impacted to show it was not based on age. So while some people may put up older folks, those chosen by the algorithm will blend in a mix of 20-30 somethings. If they don't have enough 20-30 somethings HR adds "candidates."
@aq low performers first- no ageism
Here we go again
@an what names are submitted? Older folks? Low performers? Thank you.
For the RIF earlier this year; managers were asked for names. i cannot speak for ALL RIF or layoffs.
@af They do ask for names
They don't ask for names- too many ex-employees trying to create chaos on here.
any in network services i can suggest some names if they need it. maybe TG would be a winner