Any ideas on what is the final number of employees our leadership is aiming to get to through layoffs? Is there an optimal number they think the company will be able to function on or do they just plan to continue with layoffs indefinitely (or at least until they start feeling true consequences of not having enough employees?)
11 replies (most recent on top)
If "broken up" means assets liquidated to pay off the remaining debt, then yes. HBO Max is AT&T's final desperate stand before the Titanic sinks.
So many blunders it's kind of amazing, like a work of art. The executives are completely out of touch with this generation.
https://www.fiercevideo.com/video/at-t-will-eventually-be-broken-up-analyst-says
I think the final goal is, establish the 5G nationwide, using low frequencies in the rural areas, tell the FCC that people have whatever the FCC thinks people need, and shut down the copper networks.
I believe in all the states except California, they're clear to go. As far as AT&T survival is concerned, it depends on jettisoning 20th century technologies.
The number is in the most recent earnings report. Just look for the number of employees AT&T currently has; that is the number they plan on laying off. Soon it will be Moe, Larry, Curly and Shemp running the place with a mix of offshore workers and machines processing A.I.
I know two people that need to go.
I think the real question is what is the goal for number of American employees vs the number of Indian contractors... Seems obvious based that for levels lower than Randy's direct reports the desired ratio is 100% Indian contractors to 0% American employees. The company is not so much reducing headcount; its replacing employees in a wholesale fashion.
The goal works like this.
The Johns have a discussion during the quarter and figure out how much of a shortfall they will have when they release the next earnings statement. Then they figure out how much headcount must be eliminated to fill the financial gap and this is the number of people who get surplussed each quarter.
Wash, rinse, repeat.
If they just did all of the planned lay-offs at one time they wouldn't be able to show profits every quarter. As mentioned, this is nothing more than financial engineering to make the numbers look good from quarter to quarter.
They are desperate to report income and EPS growth each quarter so they will continue to cut expenses (headcount, benefits, etc.) as long as revenue continues to decline. Managing a company based on financial engineering is not a good sign. Eventually you run out of expenses to cut and then it all implodes. The last resort would be a dividend cut. If that occurs, BOAKYAG!
@unx Well, c-ap.
RS, I think last year at Davos, said and I think I'm quoting exactly, "we only need 100,000 to run this place". Current headcount is about 250,000.