L3 Individual contributors disappearing, all getting demoted.
22 replies (most recent on top)
If you are a level 3 you should have direct reports
They demoted a lot of L3 individual contributors under Legg a long time ago. Which is just one more way to enforce that you have no future whatsoever at AT&T. If you don't wish to be a report generator, there's no possiblity for real advancement. They've created these title changes that aren't level changes but those are essentially meaningless. If you look at salary bands, they all overlap each other.
“This sounds great. Getting rid of so many leaches, and there are so, so many leaches to be flicked off”
Does AT&T hire people who can’t spell? Look up “leech”, genius.
10 hours ago by Anonymous | 3 reactions (+3/-0) | Reply
Post ID: @gy+1k0ne5hz4
Double drats you pesky grammar police. A misspelling has foiled me again. My scheme is laid plaid, all is undone.
I assure you John Stankey is not deterred by such frivolities. He is moving forward and sweeping up.
“This sounds great. Getting rid of so many leaches, and there are so, so many leaches to be flicked off”
Does AT&T hire people who can’t spell? Look up “leech”, genius.
I’m sure you are on the leach list to be “flicked off”.
This sounds great. Getting rid of so many leaches, and there are so, so many leaches to be flicked off.
Let us see AT&T Stock go to $35 after John Stankey tidies up.
Definitely title inflation here. In the old Bell Labs, L3 was called “supervisor”. L4 was called “department head”. L5 was called “director”. Now it is director, AVP and VP, respectively. But management responsibilities have not changed. Just the ego is bigger.
How did all these "Experts" and Directors get hired coming through the door in the recent few years in the Legg org and other L3's with tenor are getting downgraded?
90 percent of L3 directors are paper pushers.. they don't know jack and depend on their ad's..some directors you wonder how they got there.. People with less than 5 years experience.. come on..
L3 should be limited to the “Expert” level individual contributors. The Director L3’s should be converted to L2 supervisors (AD) and the AVP’s would have both L2 supervisors and individual contributors. My Director is a glorified project manager, without a technical degree, and has very little knowledge of what work the team is responsible for. Besides me, know one else qualifies for the TTP titles.
The need to oust the superfluous “AVP’s”. They’re more costly then L3’s and are merely gate keeping, feudal lords!
Sounds like a comment (cause it wasn’t a question) from a 3rd grader.
Please help. What do L3 and above do besides say yes over and over?
Don’t get caught up in if a L3 is a supervisor or not. It’s just a compensation approach.
T definitely over revved on L3 promotions but there still is the need for highly skilled individual contributor L3s (for technical leadership and complex program mgmt roles).
If they do away with all individual contributor L3s, then they’ll get what they paid for (and then y’all will b1tch & moan about the cruddy technical talent we have).
Note: I’m an L2.
"Some L3s don’t do any technical work..."
That's basically management :).
Nice gig if you can get it. I’m not one, but hoped to make it there some day. These roles were designed for people that have very high level responsibilities and deal with senior level folks. There used to be a lot more areas to promote to before they flattened everything (some orgs had to be flatter than others), but anyways, now there is nearly nothing to attain. They haven’t promoted anyone in a long time at the L2 office levels. It’s rare and some orgs haven’t made anyone in over 5 years. How’s that for career progression? Most of us just gave up trying. Only a few d-mb ones still fall for the tricks used only to get nothing in return. I wouldn’t gloat over the loss of that option, it was the last bastion of hope some of us had.
@c5 - you say AD's, but they are second levels, and you can say that about all supervisory second level roles. In many small teams there have been no headcount adds for over 5 years
I don’t want to say it loud but here it goes,
Some L3s don’t do any technical work, their only job to talk to various people and push them for timeline and then just take that unrealistic timeline and show it to leadership
How about ADs that only have 1-2 direct reports?
If you are a level 3 you should have direct reports
Thats been happening for years with all the “ASSOCIATE” Director positions. Dummy.
Fake news
Says who?