Thread regarding SAS Institute layoffs

All of you should be ashamed of yourselves for mocking the people who have been let go. Regardless of whatever reason " you think" they were let go, you don't know the real truth. Have some decency to recognize that these were real people just like you

Going to be fun to come back here at some point (maybe sooner than we know) and watch these young bucks who are dis-ing the people laid off - because they are "dinosaurs" who didn't adapt - and see them whining when they are RIF'ed because an AI program replaced them for writing and testing code. It WILL happen and there's NOTHING they can do about it... except learn a real trade like plumbing/carpentry/electrical/welding.

See ya back here soon!

Are any of the JMP developers or testers losing jobs?

You are so right! A man’s got to know his limitations (Credit Harry Callahan) and I’m not what I used to be. My accomplishments at SAS reduce to pile of complex code still making money for JG whilest I enjoy a commoner’s retirement. Life is good!

SAS was a he-l of an amazing place in its day and a lot of competent, innovative people helped build it! Is it wrong to celebrate that?

Oh, we're back to the Tech God/Innovation worship thing again. Well, at least that commenter is consistent in their need for affirmation of their past greatness.

"Example, the company boasts about unlimited sick time, but I know from personal experience that the policy has foundations of sand."

Unlimited time off of any kind at any company has a sandy foundation.

I would volunteer for such a package!

It also sounds pretty much in line with the 'one week for every 6 months' in the actual policy.

“ Victim that I know gets paid another month from when told, plus a year of severance. 25+ year veteran.”

That’s a righteous package all things considered. Pretty similar to the voluntary retirement buyout.

Victim that I know gets paid another month from when told, plus a year of severance. 25+ year veteran.

Regarding HR policy and severance. I wouldn't believe one word from our HR policy handbook unless its legally backed. Example, the company boasts about unlimited sick time, but I know from personal experience that the policy has foundations of sand.

"I see one comment on severance, any more info on that? Fully expecting to be next based on current assignment, 10 years r&d dev."

There's a PDF on the benefits site that details this. You're supposed to get 4 weeks, plus an additional week for every 6 months of service after 1 year. So 10 years of service would be 22 weeks of severance pay if I understand correctly.

Now someone else mentioned they only gave 4 weeks of severance pay but you can keep your benefits for 6 months. Seems strange they wouldn't offer what's in the policy.

“ I'm sure these extremely talented principals created a lot of internal documentation and created test automation suites in that case then right? If it's so complex you need 20 years to understand it. I'm sure everything anyone would need to know is written down, recorded, and complex scenarios automated... Right....? Right...........?”

In fact, the very best developers and testers created good documentation for their work/designs, etc. Testing has been automated at SAS for decades and a variety of internal testing infrastructure frameworks were created, depending upon specific SAS software components, infrastructure, etc. being tested. All of this was very necessary for R&D to function at scale and I doubt if CI/CD, Jenkins, etc.. has succeeded in displacing all of the original test Infrastructure developed internally.

It’s not merely the testware that requires deep technical expertise to correctly understand, but also the subject software being tested. The very best R&D testers across various domains (e.g. data languages, analytical algorithms, server Infrastructure, UI/UX, etc.) were/are very competent in both automated testing tools/frameworks, manual testing, etc. but also a deep understanding of the specific SAS software components/domains they test, including significant new developments to those components. This is not a small endeavor given that SAS software has evolved over the past 50+ years (the data step and initial procs existed prior to SAS being incorporated in 1976).

My guess is that most of the snarky comments here are coming from a person(s) who doesn’t really know or even care to know the history of innovation within SAS R&D. This history has been discussed at length on other SAS threads here at The Layoff.

The fact that some percentage of testers historically have been “bu-ton pushers” or otherwise less-than-ideal is no black mark on the fantastic work done by the best and brightest! These have left a legacy and their historical work (i.e. all of R&D, including Developers and Testers) is a big part (not the whole thing because business people have to be credited too) of why anyone is still employed at SAS today because without their contribution there would be no ongoing revenue stream.

No insight as to who was let go or why - but some of these comments seem to presume that deep testing of the precision and boundary conditions of complex statistical algorithms - SAS's bread and bu-ter - is somehow akin to the web-based UI or standard software functionality testing that, say, 'a comp sci junior' has familiarity with.

It's possible that these particular testers DID do that kind of basic stuff. They MIGHT have been UI testers. But a lot of the software testing at SAS is qualitatively different from most software testing.

Casting stones without knowing is foolish.

"Perhaps the commentor is themself a compsci Junior with an overinflated estimation of their technical capabilities relative to what is required to EFFECTIVELY test highly complex software constructed with algorithms and techniques that you don't learn in any computer science degree nor YouTube video."

I'm sure these extremely talented principals created a lot of internal documentation and created test automation suites in that case then right? If it's so complex you need 20 years to understand it. I'm sure everything anyone would need to know is written down, recorded, and complex scenarios automated... Right....? Right...........?

I see one comment on severance, any more info on that? Fully expecting to be next based on current assignment, 10 years r&d dev.

"... has less technical skill than a comp sci junior"

Not sure how that can be objectively quantified. Perhaps the commentor is themself a compsci Junior with an overinflated estimation of their technical capabilities relative to what is required to EFFECTIVELY test highly complex software constructed with algorithms and techniques that you don't learn in any computer science degree nor YouTube video.

It's true that SAS has suffered historically from underskilled and even downright clueless testers. Dealt with this kind of incompetence regularly in my R&D tenure.

However, there are also highly skilled testers, several whom developed their careers over years of focused, hard work, while others have advanced degrees and applied math necessary for the area they are testing.

Nevertheless, "Principal in Name Only" has been a problem within SAS R&D every since the title began to be given (around 2007) based on extended years of service plus maybe one year of sacrificial effort or one big innovation win.

Many of the earliest R&D developers, who were giving the Principal title had 15 years of hard-core proven experience and in some cases were nationally known experts (even outside of SAS) in their specialty before they received the title.

They were only a handful of Principal Software Developers prior to the year 2000 and I'm not even sure when the first tester receive the title.

"Of the 5 testers in our group that were let go, all had written automated tests"

The skill gap was too great to keep them on for the salary they were making. The company cannot afford to over pay a principal test engineer who has less technical skill than a comp sci junior. Maybe they should have listened to the company direction set forth years ago and taken learning a useful skill to heart rather than attempt to coast on bu-ton clicking and institutional knowledge?

“ Of the 5 testers in our group that were let go, all had written automated tests as well as done manual testing. And all were women over 55. They were also the ones with the most seniority and probably making the most money. If anybody truly believes this had anything to do with something other than the bottom line, they're delusional.”

Yep, now SAS can hire more TQI+ Zommers for 40% less and increase their stature in the “woke” corporation scorecard olympics.

Middle management was not unscathed. They were also not consulted on who to let go.

How is it that the middle management is unscathed and will continue to have their jobs and make more money ?
Aren’t the managers supposed to be responsible, encourage and provide growth opportunities for the employees?

Beats me

Of the 5 testers in our group that were let go, all had written automated tests as well as done manual testing. And all were women over 55. They were also the ones with the most seniority and probably making the most money. If anybody truly believes this had anything to do with something other than the bottom line, they're delusional.

…feature factory…

The plain fact is that DevOps, Agile, CI/CD, etc. are not magic bullets that have resulted in significantly better technology/software, nor guaranteed successful products ANYWHERE and especially at SAS. Virtually everyone involved in the massive West Coast tech layoffs are experts at many-to-all of these modern Dev philosophies/practices and the highly unsuccessful products they were responsible for are the result.

The “boutique R&D” environment that originally made SAS successful could have kept it successful had the right compensation structures been in place and the hiring of only top A-list professionals continued. The problem is is this has been watered down and slowly diminishing for the past 20 years. SAS Culture cannot correctly function as a “feature factor”. It’s slow death is a result of having this mindset foisted upon it.

Most that were let go were NOT manual testers.

So I take it most of those let go were manual testers? They are often the ones that know the product inside and out. But I guess all test automation all the test time now!

Why don't we have an anonymous way to submit the names of folks that need to go, from the top on down, and they can run SAS against it and make a list.

Former employee here. They haven’t sold product in ages, renewals are way down, JG has been floating all these legacy employees for years. I agree with SAS being past its sell by date. When I was laid off I got 3 months plus my bonus (fyi). The sales teams lack industry knowledge and many high level consultants have been out of the market for too long to be relevant.

I think that once these employees get out the will recognize the Stockholm syndrome and find peace.

Maybe we will get lucky and the person in the corner of R will get axed too, after being the henchman for the rest of R&D. He seems to think he is doing such a great job. Two years is coming up, his expiration date should be soon.

The process seemed very random. They lost a lot of good employees.

Loyal employees who worked 10 hours weeks for 20 years. And, loyal employees who when asked to write a single line of a test automation script would balk at the idea they would have to keep up with the market in terms of skills.

You don't get tenure in the business world years accrued doesn't guarantee you a position. If all of these people are the best performers at SAS it sounds like they would find a new job in a heart beat.

No amount of screwing over loyal employees is going to change the fact that SAS is way past its "sell by date." So why is JHG trying to simultaneously sc--w over his once great legacy?

You've worked with every single person laid off where you can make the claim that every person laid off was a high performer?

Casting doubt on your claim here.

The ones laid off were all high performers

Fair enough, I don't disagree with anything you've said.

At the same time I think SAS has given people more opportunity to adapt than most other companies would have. When was the CI/CD transition along with the mandated learning program they put in place? Pre-covid? So 3-4 years ago?

If someone has proof of some truly high performing employees being let go, then I will retract my statement.

Hmm. That assertion has a questionable basis in fact when the testers themselves (and DevOps engineers, and software developers, et al.) haven't been the ones moving people from one job "family" to another over the past several years in an endless series of reorgs that seemed designed to punish some people for success and reward others for failure.

So some SDETs became SDs, some SDs became SDETs, some SDETs became "Infrastructure Specialists", etc. all at the whim of management and HR who don't even seem to understand the rules of their own game. Some of the "testers" that were let go were probably developers before any one of the last several reorgs in R&D, and management has slowly been pushing them in the direction of eventually leaving the company one way or another because they don't like them, or because their specialty is a product they don't want to support but can't ditch because they still have someone in their organization supporting it.

I left SAS some time ago, but let's be honest a large margin of testers at SAS were pulling down six figure incomes to click bu-tons and verify functionality manually. The writing has been on the wall for some time to learn new skills or start looking for a new job.

I do feel bad for those affected and I wish them all the best, but the software testing of 20 years ago does not apply today.

I know someone high up. Can't name names... And, I was told they put names in a hat to choose which people to layoff. Word on the street they are going to have free pizza on Fridays to help with morale and avoid people from talking about this.

I do know there's something else coming soon. Keep your head down people and batten the hatches...

I have heard 76 people were laid off in sales and marketing. Does anyone know details or affected positions or titles? Thank you

Principal level test engineers got axed. Only the young survived... good luck with testing.

Also heard that one group had 16 layoffs, all women over 55.