If these are not performance-related layoffs, then what are the criteria for who gets notified that they are no longer needed here?
7 replies (most recent on top)
People are feeling that the US is taking the majority of the worldwide layoff number.
Seems closer to rng than a plan
Using the word “execution” in this context is a bit too brutal… your paycheck and the color of your hair are all that matters. The gray hair that symbolized Old Testament wisdom is a millstone around around experienced employees’ necks…
What we have been told is not reality. It is marketing / legal talk. The reality is that it is about cost and final decisions are made by politics. My manager and some other teams under that manager were all impacted. Very strong people have been let go without any input from their manager. In some instances managers didn’t even get a chance to communicate to their impacted employees. A lot of people are angry at the process. We understand that it needs to happen… but it is about the execution and the communication … and the treatment of employees. Many not impacted are already looking for work.
HR intentionally makes it cloak and dagger. I don't know if they fear that we'll message externally to clients or what, I feel like the "you only know if people got laid off if literally the entire team is gone" approach just leads to a culture of fear and worry.
The criteria is to de-invest in non-strategic areas, per the board. The reality is that certain groups are likely to be more laid off than others. Some of it may be strategic per the board, but it's also a great opportunity to cut more expensive jobs for the corporation as a whole (see 2019 layoffs when HANA Dev in NA was eliminated).
Ironically I found out the reason I was laid off in 2019 as only one of four in a division of 450+ employees was that we were all made examples of for being remote (before the pandemic forced us all remote and proved that it worked with higher productivity and collaboration still happening).
Such is life...
What's being posted here is going against my expectations and understanding of layoffs. RE: more widespread and scattergun rather than targeted.
My understanding was that this was more structured to discontinue investment in areas no longer strategic or core to the direction SAP is heading in. And reallocate that investment to the future strategic areas. In essence, roles are being lost and not jobs. There are loads of internal jobs available. Communication in country via local all hands has been that everything possible will be done to find suitable roles for anyone affected. I'm in Europe and we have a workers council which is discussing all these aspects. So perhaps that may be the difference.
Either way, I don't think some of the posts here do much for anyone fearful. And some probably don't reflect the reality. Like most tech companies when it comes to layoffs, they rarely hit the number announced.
Thats why everyone is worried :-(