Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

@dvg, thank you for clarifying and my apologies if I caused confusion, most definitely not my intent...I was going off of what OP was asking, the leaked slide, and confirmation that is in fact the criteria being used as confirmed by posters who received ISP yesterday and today. My heart goes out to everyone, honestly I'm quite taken aback that Successful SSL4/5 is coming as surprise to so many people as criteria as this is the same criteria we've used in the past (I had the unfortunate task of doing 2 large actions while I was there). The difference was that we had the BE rating which I understand has recently been eliminated. Now, it seems Intel is equating Successful SSL4/5 as BE which is likely the culprit. It also seems to me that managers who have always applied SSL4/5 to Successful didn't fully grasp how detrimental it would be to ee's by continuing to use it to stretch budget...trust me, I'm heartbroken seeing this happen...but if its any consolation, life outside of Intel is amazing, though i wish everyone much future success who remains with the company...

@bzq: I have no problem with what you said about getting a good rating but low stock - that's confusing, and it's good to lay it out clearly. That wasn't what the OP asked, though - he/she was asking whether a 2015 SSL4 qualifies for ISP if 2016 was SSL3. You said SSL4 in EITHER year makes you ISP-eligible, which contradicts the leaked slide and everything I've seen so far during THIS layoff. That's my only concern - you otherwise gave great info.

@H6IjoHd-uie Yes, no longer with Intel. FYI, the current action is using the same components (Ratings/SSL/ISP/VSP/RDP/ERP) that Intel has used for years, they are simply applying the criteria differently and using a different historical timeline. None of which I referred to in my post, other than to answer what the OP asked for clarification on provided within their post. Therefore, I answered appropriately. Explaining how/why someone can get an EE/O and still receive low SSL brings clarity for people who may not understand how ratings/SSL get applied...these are the same measures used in every action, they haven't changed in 20 years (well 15 years ago we used to refer to ISP as ISO). If you feel the explanation I gave about how someone can get high ratings with low SSL is invalid that's absolutely acceptable and your choice, interpret that as you wish.

@cvj/@vjr: WAS with Intel? If you're not currently with HR, what's the basis of your knowledge of THIS layoff? The slide was poorly written, and some of it is up for interpretation, but you can't argue around the "consecutive". If you're saying the slide is inaccurate, fine, but then you need to establish how you know what the criteria actually are, and past HR experience doesn't cut it, with the way the criteria have been changing. On an anonymous board, saying "trust me" doesn't carry much water.

how about this folks, @vjr here..I was with Intel for almost 2 decades, part of which time I was an HRBP. I'm posting from knowledge, not taking a guess or trying to steer anyone wrong...I'm interpreting the criteria the way I understand HR works. Hope this helps...

It's true that the third bullet is written poorly (wonder what that professional slide-writer got on their focal), but that still doesn't make @vjr's statement accurate to the slide. As I understand it, the last two criteria on the slide, written clearly, are that an employee is eligible if 2) SSL4/5 in BOTH 2015 and 2016 UNLESS EE or O in BOTH years, or 3) SSL4/5 in 2016, UNLESS EE or O in 2015 or 2016.

Could be wrong, but I don't see another interpretation that makes sense.

OP: you're correct to be confused, the slide has an error on the 3rd bullet, it should be "or", not "and". You can't get an EE AND O rating in the same Focal year, it's either/or...so what -vjr says is correct.

Recent College Graduate.

What is an RCG?

No - have you seen people getting ISP'd who don't fit the criteria?

Haven't you figured out yet that the slide is not authentic?

What @vjr said is inconsistent with the leaked slide; according to that, the second criterion is CONSECUTIVE SSL4/5 in 2015 and 2016, and no O or EE in those years. Assuming the slide is accurate, you wouldn't qualify for ISP.

Somewhere out there is a compiler turning over in its grave... :P

it means that if you received SSL4/5 in either year (or both) then you get ISP, unless you got an EE or O rating in either of those years (2015 or 2016). Some people can get EE/O with SSL4/5 if they moved from one position to another late in the year, where they receive the high rating for the work they performed in prior year (losing manager input) but have not had time to demonstrate their value to the new team so new manager (gaining manager input) will give lower SSL which is valid and not a marker of low performance. Successful with SSL4/5 is also acceptable when given to RCGs and not a marker of low performance therefore RCGs have been exempted from receiving ISP.