#management

Can someone tell me why it takes the managers anywhere from three weeks to three months to approve pto?

This is very sad that most of the companies are adapting to new tech like AI and laying off due to improvements but at FIS a "BIG BANKING PRODUCT" related company people are being laid off due to poor management

Anything going to happen besides top level management gone? New leadership July 1 but not a word about the rest of the peons.

we had a huge onsite then my vp lost his job. reorg already done under Brenda and MED. VPs gone, sr dir gone, MED gone. how many leaders are being cut next under Barsam's new vp from ny?

My manager moved to another team so what's the point?? Lol

I'm sure it's not anonymous so does it even matter?

The new strategy seems clear - scare us into quitting so they don't have to pay severance. Managers are allowed to treat people terribly and threaten us with firings but I've never seen anyone actually fired. Let them try. I'm not doing them any favors. If they want me out, they can pay me what I'm owed.

They want the easy magical solution that uses the cool new flashy thing.

The funny thing? AI can be leveraged by existing or new deterministic automation solutions where applicable. But the leaders making decisions aren't engineers, and have a view that applications can't evolve or add new features. That they have to build something NEW instead to show off and gain notoriety.

And so you get a cycle of projects gaining traction and getting ki-led off.

The competitive nature in which teams have to compete for funding has been a drastic mistake. It is profoundly stupid. I get it, you want teams to have some drive to make better solutions. But it doesn't work out in a company like Optum where non-technical people are even so close to engineering that they're directly managing the engineers. Instead what you get are good products and teams getting ki-led off in favor of unproven moonshot projects that exist solely to extract money from the business with no vision for the future.

Well said, @ag+1kt753mf9.

I actually think layoffs could be beneficial for this place. We have so many layers of management doing exactly nothing that nobody would miss. Instead of laying off the people who actually get things done, they should for once let go of the right people and everybody would benefit.

For a company that keeps using the excuse of needing to reduce spending and be tighter with its Financials, this whole AT&T partnering with Disney for Toy Story 5 is asinine considering they just forced whole centers of reps and managers Into virtual / surplus if they dont follow the work. They allege to care about families but only if they can use the caring as a distraction from what they are ACTUALLY doing behind the scenes in trying to force these so called centers of excellence or expertise or whatever they are called. Thus far there have been sweeping firings of ADs at both the Richardson and Mesa locations because of rampant Integrity violations and one of them has both ADs and all of the Managers on FWW write ups..but this is the center of excellence right?...

If every 10 employees lose 3 positions while management remains unchanged, the organization should also evaluate manager-level roles. Workforce reductions should be based on efficiency and business needs at every level—not only on frontline employees. A balanced approach creates fairness, accountability, and a leaner organization.

1. Do not trust anyone at Boeing you work with; co-workers, college friends or managers. Any of these people will not hesitate to stab you in the back if they believe they will get ahead doing so.
2. Do no more than the absolute bare minimum in preforming your job. Never take on any additional work because there is nothing to gain for doing so.
3. Don't give your manager, lead or coworkers your cell number. Once you are off the clock for the day you have no obligation taking any work-related calls.
4. Never delay taking any PTO due to work obligations.
5. Do not consider becoming a Whistleblower. If you do decide to, you better first contact the FBI and ask them to put you in the Federal Witness Protect Program.

HR call Monday with my manager.

I can’t understand why the company is launching all these products that end up being duds. Products that have very little AUM in them after 1-2 years and where they likely will not grow to reach scale. It ends up being a drain on resources and time and effort from various teams. Why? Just to keep people in a job and to use certain products as scapegoats for not winning.

Sales team probably said they could sell it. Product team likely did analysis to say it could be a winner. Management must’ve signed off on it.

Where is the accountability?

I thought the re-org was supposed to eliminate the chapter model. Why am I still reporting to a do-nothing, useless people manager?

I'm just not seeing much evidence of it in practice. Most internal openings seem to follow a predictable path. Everyone goes through the application process, interviews happen, and then somehow the outcome is exactly what people predicted on day one. After seeing it happen enough times, most people stop bothering.

What will happen to ESG ?

I've been here long enough to remember the old days. When someone with real knowledge gave notice, management would scramble, make a counteroffer, promise to make necessary changes. They'd do whatever it took to keep them.

That doesn't happen anymore. I can't recall the last time someone stayed because they got a better deal from us. People give notice and management just says okay, good luck. That's not smart at all, in my opinion. It'll cost us in the end.

Every projects I’ve worked on had Manager/IC ratio > 2:1. The most recent one was 6:1. Does the MC realize they can cut the managers by 1/2 or 2/3 to achieve greater cost savings?

Several people on our sales team were surplussed on Wednesday-all had good numbers compared to those of use that weren't impacted, our sales manager said that the selection process was above his pay grade and that she had no say what-so-ever in the selection, one of the sellers let go was the oldest person on the team, a white guy who was crushing it this year and had the highest production on the team, the other two who were let go were also older members of the team , on e them was third on the team in production. Those of us left are newer to the team and are glad we were spared but are trying to understand how this selection process works

Which companies have two redundant layers of IT management , after being outsourced / offshored .
Why is it required ?

Did you guys see SV’s presentation? He has figured out that physical AI technology of RemainCo is going to change the world and shoot this company to the top. Much as his career has taken off in last 30 years with only PowerPoint slides, without ever getting his hands dirty with any tech project.
Also with UOP taking over HPS management, it’s star is going to shine. Two years ago UOP took over Solstice AM management just for four months before they spun it out and the latter’s stock price has doubled in just 6 months.

The emea HR director should be fired. They doing illegal hiring and firing practices.

Emea hr director don't have formal B school education. Zoology education they have must fit for managing zoo not corporate.

So so happy that the shift bid for the valued tenured employees was canceled in our dept. Management saw the value in us, when we expressed our opinions on the proposed shift bid. Lost many a nights sleep over the past 2 weeks, Wayfairs management actually does care and I really love the direction they took, its only fair that the people working on the affected day work the Saturday shift. Makes me so happy to work for Wayfair and the dept that I am in.

Fideliscare of NJ. Care Management. If we do not apply for VSP, come end of July and they need to layoff, who makes the decision about who will be layed off? Does the direct supervisor have input? What about the manager?

Who makes the final decision and do they get additional input from anyone?

I read the Annual Report this morning so none of you has to. It just repeats the same junk talking points that Go Go always spouts out.
That 5 minutes I’ll never get back.

My team just moved managers to individual contributors because they had about far below the new minimum requirement of 9 directs. This was a major positive because they were very negative and known for micromanaging and creating rework for their directs and now the directs have a decent manager. Anyone else seeing good or bad things because of this rule? It looks like it’s rolling out faster in some groups that others.

If we replaced the operating committee with AI agents trained on the latest groupthink, what would change.

nada.

These people have no clue.

After over a decade in corporate banking, I’ve realized that one of the most frustrating things about modern corporate culture is when performance expectations become increasingly subjective.

It’s one thing to be measured on clear outcomes, production, quality, deadlines, or objective standards. It’s another to be told you need more “critical thinking,” more “ownership,” more “judgment,” or more “independence” without clear definitions of what success actually looks like.

What I’ve experienced is a shift away from structured work and toward ambiguity. Employees are expected to make decisions with incomplete information, navigate constantly changing expectations, and somehow know exactly what leaders want even when the target keeps moving.

The irony is that the people doing the work are often asking for clarity because they genuinely want to succeed. Instead, they can be labeled as needing too much guidance or not being independent enough.

At some point, organizations have to ask themselves whether they are creating environments where people can succeed or environments where expectations are so subjective that almost anyone can be told they aren’t meeting them.

I’ve always believed that if someone knows what success looks like, most people will work hard to achieve it. The challenge is when success becomes a moving target.

Maybe it’s not that employees don’t want to perform. Maybe they’re exhausted from trying to hit goals that are difficult to define in the first place.

Back in November last year, in UK at least, without any warning the number of days of additional annual leave was reduced from 10 to 5. We were told at the time it was a mistake and when DXC Select reopened in the summer you could buy the extra 5, to restore normality.
Did that happen? Or did DXC management mislead again?
(I'm only curious as I got redundancy a few weeks ago)

layoffs sometimes hit front-line employees hardest? For every manager affected, 8-9 employees lose their jobs. A better approach would be rotating managers across teams and applying equal accountability at all levels. Restructuring should be fair from top to bottom

FIS has layers and layers of Management.
Basically these managers contribute zero value addition.
Have never seen Ajay Goud, Ajay Gupta or Ramanand speak a single word during meeting.
They hardly participate in technical discussions.
If Elon Musk takes over FIS, I guess all of them will lose job on day 1

… that’s all.

And why are first line managers Directors?

At most other companies Directors at least second line managers.

What is the Role of Senior Managers and MD?

Ken L has been removed from Value. Another useless arrogant pompous clown who should have been removed years ago.

For Juneteenth the last couple years, you know, when we were trying to pretend to be hip and woke?

Some managers and dirs just do follow ups, just they pressure on developers to deliver data to meet deadlines. They didn't even know proper architecture, business, no proper direction to dev's and some even don't know basic git commands. I don't know how are they even surviving in this org.

I joined today's ESPP call after hearing about the share scheme and understanding that managers had been awarded shares, with some reportedly receiving free shares worth around $10,000. I expected the session to explain a similar opportunity for employees.

Instead, we were told that we can participate by purchasing shares at a 15% discount. While I appreciate that a discounted purchase plan has value, it was disappointing to learn that managers receive shares at no cost while individual contributors are expected to buy them.

The difference in treatment feels inconsistent with the "One Hitachi" message that was highlighted during the presentation. If the goal is to foster a sense of shared ownership and unity across the organisation, a scheme that is perceived as benefiting one group significantly more than another risks sending the opposite message.

Just to confirm, this will be implemented to track us and help them get rid of us?