In my humble opinion the data says it all. Hi-Tech has always been a little ageist but Intel has excelled at being really bad in its behavior towards the labor force. Time and again Intel lays off hundreds, if not thousands, and then replaces those laid-off with contract labor. This last round's data definitely points an accusing finger at the issue of ageism. Intel's Grand Poobah's claim of having to do this layoff because Intel owes it to their shareholders is true, but it is still rubbish. Intel represents all that is wrong with the unrestrained profit-is-everything, greed-is-good mentality that prevails in this world today. Intel wants to show itself to the world as a progressive and caring employer. Unfortunately, such is not the case. I sincerely hope that one day when Intel pulls this crap they get burned so badly that the whole cesspool collapses on itself. I guess that sentiment goes for any other company whose behavior is a reflection of Intel's. I grew up in an era where a company's loyalty was to their employees as well as their shareholders. There existed the belief that the labor force was what made money for the company. Hence, it was a very valuable part of the company. This is not so anymore. One might look at what I've written and say that I am "resistant to change dude" (there should have been a comma between 'change' and 'dude', dude). Maybe I am, but I have always been receptive to change for the better. The fact is, we all are human beings. As workers we deserve to be respected and treated as valuable members of the corporate team.
35 replies (most recent on top)
Hahahaha!
Also, our lawyers have reviewed our ISP process and sees no issues, so please do not waste our time with any threats about legal actions. We thank you for your contributions at Intel and wish you the best with your futures endeavors.
Nobody is above ISP. We do a strictly objective SQL query of all employees' SSLs for the past 3 years to obtain the ISP list. This process is in the Intel documenation.
Nobody is safe
I had one in,my first year of service, 3 years back. I was told itz not a performance thing then. I joined with a raise in May 2012, so basically since,my contribution is minimum given that I joined in May, thatz all I get. Focals for the,first year not,taken seriously? Please advise. I got s3's after that
Yep, it would not be beyond those Intel bastards to apply past SSL4/5s again.
They can still use last 3 years focals/SSLs. Something like, if you have ANY SSL4/5 in the past 3 years, you are on the new ISP list.
We would need another focal (2016) for another meritocracy based layoff. Not sure how they can do it without that
Anonymous148530,
Really? Where did u get this from? And what is the criteria for layoff?
Hell yes. Another layoff. Bring it!!!!!!!
Word has it that there will be monthly layoffs until headcount is down to 100k.
Word has it September has another round of meritocracy layoffs. Some of those posting here laughing will be laid off by end of month.
I hope so
Sep 15 another lay off coming
Sep 15 another lay off coming
Yeah, management feedback tool is pretty useless. I have been more inclined to respond to MFT more often than Focal feedback for my managers since MFT has been more anonymous (multiple choices). However, I have never seen any changes resulting from MFT, especially the negative feedback I have provided.
Funny you mentioned management feedback tool. I was the one who provided my manager with not so positive but honest feedback; I received multiple ssl4 as a reward. But I am still glad for what I did and still hope Intel will continue do well as a company.
Yes, all Intel managers with low scores on the Management Feedback Tool should be on next the ISP list. No feedback from employees should also be considered negative feedback.
"Intel cannot continue to do the same things and expect different results. Long timers are very resistant to changes, so we need to purge these folks out."
Then change MCM and management. The worker bees aren't the ones setting the strategy. The worker bees didn't decide to do MICA because they are attention whores that wanted their daughter to think their asshole dad that was never there is now cool. The worker bees didn't decide to wrap $ around every mobile chip. If you want new decisions and new thoughts keeping the same "leaders" ain't changing shit
I hope Intel got rid if you. Don't complain, get back to work, and just be glad you still have a job.
The layoff is over. For the love of God please get a job
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
What, no comments about H1B people?!
Pathetic loser board
lol
Blah blah blah. Get a job fools
The only way Intel can apply changes to the company culture is to get new blood into the mix. Intel cannot continue to do the same things and expect different results. Long timers are very resistant to changes, so we need to purge these folks out.
Intel is digging its own grave. It is NO longer sought after company. There are people at 10+ grade level who have no clue what the *&%^ they are doing, except run their mouth and rest get carried away. So at the end it is breeding decadent culture.
Intel is digging its own grave. It is NO longer sought after company. There are people at 10+ grade level who have no clue what the *&%^ they are doing, except run their mouth and rest get carried away. So at the end it is breeding decadent culture.
When a company is in a downturn, "Out with the old, in with the new" should apply to employees.
I agree. Intel will say, "It's a new age of new types of employees at Intel." Old timers can no longer say BS nonsense such as, "That's just how we have been doing things at Intel."
I do agree with Intel's philosophy that no employee is indispensable, even managers and above. I see too many long-timers at Intel who think they are better than everybody and they can do no wrong. They have been getting away with their rude, arrogant attitude because higher-ups do not have the balls to do anything about them and they are afraid of having to replace these aholes.
Trump will punish Intel.
The message was GTFO round one
It's all about money. BK laid off folks to clearly send a message to his employees. Was it a good message? We will see.