Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

We're now in layoffs round 2

As mentioned in February, the end of March was only the first round of layoffs. We're now deep in round 2, this round will be larger, harsher and much less transparent. Additional rounds will follow in Q3 and Q4 as Intel opted for the slow, piecemeal grind instead of one huge shock-and-awe layoff campaign. Combined with forced and encouraged attrition, this company will be completely unrecognizable one year from now.

by
| 4363 views | | 7 replies (last May 9, 2023) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1mxwPjy5

7 replies (most recent on top)

Management is closely watching the activities of employees in order to evaluate performance metrics and target non-performers. This includes time spent on laptop and meeting attendance as well as what you are doing on your laptop. You have been warned. Good luck.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wpv+1mxwPjy5

So it seems like they took the same approach as last round. Business units were allowed to meet reduced budgets through GSD (program reductions) or through CPM (layoffs). My division within in SATG was able to meeting with program reductions and no layoffs. We were lucky this round

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @pft+1mxwPjy5

You necessarily wouldn’t hear the layoff notification from your manager. They play lucky Santa.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @amf+1mxwPjy5

Moving too sow on cuts... When sales are down 36%, and HC actually up vs a year ago, one has to question what is going on Inside Intel.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @pit+1mxwPjy5

Lack of transparency is by design, as they basically want to crush morale in order to encourage more attrition. They are playing a very dangerous game IMO.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ntq+1mxwPjy5

What a moral crusher, it will only get worse and worse as performance continues to go down

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fto+1mxwPjy5

Layoff without transparency is dangerous. Apparently managers doesn’t seem to even know or rather pretend not to know anything even on the day of layoff.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lqp+1mxwPjy5

Post a reply

: