Some comments are gold.
Did you guys read this post on the portal?
7 replies (most recent on top)
@dpr so basically the analysis is telling you to stop with the layoffs. But Meg thinks she can squeeze a little more performance through veiled threats so she can pad her bonus.
Dear L3,
The fact you find it necessary to note that you are L3 (supervisor would work) tells me you are an insecure middle manager at best, someone who never had the talent or capacity at any juncture in your career @ HPE or elsewhere to lead. In fact, the truth is you visit this site in search of potential information about your own situation. When individual contributors are axed, well, supervisors are next on the chopping block.
HPE became HPE for the purpose of spinning off a segment of HP which was ultimately not an attractive buy as a whole. End of story. The 5 year plan put in place back in November is exactly that: Sell off in segments, all while contributing to Meggie s and her crew's wealth.
Anyone who works for HPE hopefully has a polished, updated resume and is open to other opportunities. Including you, L3.
Dear Mr. Level 3:
I'm sure there are consultations, but honestly, I know of at least one specific person who was targeted for WFR SPECIFICALLY because of his geographic location in the first wave. He was a "mission critical" guy and responsible for customer-facing projects that directly impacted our success with that customer. There was no consideration for who he was to our team and how detrimental it would be to our business... and worse, it demonstrated upper management's blatant message: nobody is untouchable. Combined with all the other blatant demoralizing policies put in place, many of our best people sent out their resumes and moved to greener pastures.
Somebody needs to also tell Meg that being dragged into an "All Employees meeting" and the headliner message is (paraphrasing here) "we are doing a fantastic job of firing Americans and Europeans and hiring people in the third world to replace them!" is sociopathic behavior at its apex.
At least Mike Lawrie was saying the right things when he talked about the upcoming merger between ES and CSC. I hope that bodes well for those people... Directors need to understand that blindly chasing the mighty dollar does not always lead to more profits; sometimes that chase lands you in a pit. I suspect the HPI and HPE boards have lost sight of the bigger picture in their race to chop up the pieces and milk the stock for all it is apparently worth. You can't build a successful company that way - but then again, Meg's goals are not long term for anything associated with Hewlett-Packard beyond her final cash out.
BTW... I am a Level 3 and I regularly check this site (and other similar forums) as a personal tool to have a feel of what the base really feels. Besides a few selected entries/comments that can be handpicked, most of what is posted here is not factual/true. I am not against forums like this (not at all). I think they are a good tool and a way foe employees to share their valid frustrations. We are not zombies 100% in agreement with some tasks assigned to do as per business directives, but we are accountable for the execution. I was also laid off from another Company years ago, so I know first hand how it feels. It's not we (Managers) against you (although I recognize and acknowledge if you feel that way). We ate all in this boat together. I execute my directives, as well as you do yours. I am not heartless... It's not easy for us either. Sigh... Not sure what else to say.
The 'Cost Of Quality' related metrics are showing a concerning trend. When we do a workforce reduction analysis, we do a risk assessment based on standard checklists to identify the 'optimum' resources combination of total cost reduction and risks. We clearly understand that hc reduction has an impact curve, but that tends to stabilize pretty quickly, based on similar efforts in the past. This time the impact curve has reached a level that triggered the direct involvement of upper management. New metrics targets will be cascaded at all mgt levels, and direct accountability will be tightly tied to performance reviews. Meg's video was basically the kick off of the effort. In plain English... You don't meet your personal quality metrics/targets, you will be heavily penalized in your performance review.
Quality!? Snort / laugh. They have laid off 25% of my team - that work did not follow those people out the door. It was absorbed by those left behind. I now do the job of 3 analysts. I am making tons of mistakes and have quite a bit of rework. You will not get quality went the quantity of work becomes unbearable.
I immediately delete anything sent from that hag.