How are they deciding layoffs?

With the arbitration agreement and continuance of layoffs/slashing benefits, I'm sure that these layoffs will continue/hinted at.

They say that not having a project that's tied to business/strategic goals means that you have a higher chance of being laid off, but so do people who disagree publically, people who speak up, etc... It's all over the place, to the point of everyone having the chance to be laid off. Same with people who come in 2x instead of 3x.

They removed Agile scrum masters, but still want Agile to work/the team to run Agile. They also converted DPOs/DPMs to analysts, but they still do a portion of their old job. I can't think of a reasoning behind this.

Comment! It's anonymous!

5 replies (most recent on top)

Yes, I used to chuckle at those foppish 20-something McKinsey consultants running in and out of the offices in our area. Laugh was on me when I got demoted.

We know what it means to sever.

Forging ahead with a mostly uninformed guess. It all starts with some McKinsey or McKinsey-adjacent analysis calling for X number of cuts to increase probability. By the way McKinsey is not a nonprofit so this costs a small fortune even before anyone is fired. Cut to conversations and bargaining in smoke-filled rooms as the primary executives, decked out in the latest USAA branded half zips, duke out amongst their deputies where these cuts need to be made. Loyalty tests and jockeying for power ensue - who can show the most enthusiasm for layoffs and disregard for human suffering? Out of the shadows, the corporate equivalents of pick me girls emerge. Think, the Tiffany Haddish scene with the grapefruit. These are your "winners" and USAA's finest. As the decisions trickle down, this can take various forms. (Watch Office Space if you haven't already.) Some teams may be considered low hanging fruit like the culture team if they are labeled organizational fluff. (Cuz, who needs culture when you can purchase B-roll of the American flag and hire an actor to salute a coffin.) Other teams are just caught in the crossfire. Keep in mind layoffs and cuts are very normal for the financial industry yet at USAA, it takes on a warped unprofessional aspect in which the execution is way off and triggers outrage and unrest reverbating through the remaining staff. Even McKinsey or whichever collection of sociopathic hired g-ns who helped to orchestrate it all are like facepalming as they watch it making notes for their other customers how not to fudge the bed whilst downsizing. USAA will definitely be featured as a case study that will be turned around and sold to other clients. The most aggravating aspect of all, there is way too much on this site and others about favoritism towards women with cosmetic enhancement and other extremely messy sounding shenanigans to believe that all of the firing decisions when implemented are fair and above board. Like I said though all just a guess.

They use a dart board with each COSA listed.

It’s totally random and no one can control the outcome. You just have to keep going and stuffing each paycheck into savings just in case.

Thread regarding USAA layoffs

How are they deciding layoffs?

5 replies (most recent on top)

Post a reply