I hear people say it's not based on performance, and if that's true, what are the deciding factors?
10 replies (most recent on top)
@qg last purge for my department were all senior staff, albeit pretty jaded already but all were top performers and higher on the payscale
Never saw Comcast ask who was a good performer when they did layoffs. Instead they looked at what people were paid and got rid of the highest paid
@ak not once in nearly twenty years have I seen Comcast pick the worst performers for layoffs. Usually, leaders pick the people who have the nerve to not su-k up to them. I probably would've been gone a while ago but my boss knows the team would revolt if he did that. I'm hoping to be gone this time though, I'm weary of the constant uncertainty.
@ak problem is most VPs don't know anything. Decisions are being made above them. Wouldn't be surprised if some SVPs are out of the loop as well. Especially if SVP+ are possibly on the chopping block.
@ak As someone who has been laid off numerous times in the telecom industry, sometimes entire departments were scrapped, in a union setting it went by seniority, another time it was pretty much the teachers pets who stayed on, and yet another it was management or simply a title that was the determining factor.
It will definitely based on performance. If they are going to a VP is talking to his directs and says "we need to cut x% of employees", give me names by the end of the week - they are absolutely going to use this time to get rid of the employees who contribute least to the most important projects/environments.
Anyone know if they’re accepting volunteers at this point? I want off this sinking ship.
@a2 so many VPs who report into VPs where they only function to pass information through, ridiculous
Likely leadership and McKinsey going through org charts and asking "what do they do?" "What does it bring to business?" And also looking to flatten layers with how many VPs report into other VPs.
Who you’re friends with.