Thread regarding Cisco Systems Inc. layoffs

IPF exclusion of 1.45

Any thoughts on LR safety if your FY19 IPF was 1.33? At the time I thought it was pretty good. But I missed the cut.

by
| 3831 views | | 6 replies (last August 18, 2020) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+16ur57Vt

6 replies (most recent on top)

Nobody is safe. An American with a high IPF can easily replaces with 2 offshore resources or 2 redbadges with medium performance and skill sets.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1rnk+16ur57Vt

ipf is a meaningless abitrary number
what matters in this decision tree;
• protected class or not ( excluding age )
• age ( are you “old tired expensive”

if you are not in first branch you best hope not to be in the second one , else bye-bye

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hhb+16ur57Vt
Where is that 1.33 criteria from? Any source?

You sound like an engineer reading a specification.
The OP is stating that they have 1.33, thinking they were safe.
I had 1.2 and thought I was a star. Turns out I must be middle of the pack at best.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rsr+16ur57Vt

only thing that matters in the decision tree
• protected class or not ( excluding age )
• age ( are you “old tired expensive”

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ymm+16ur57Vt

In my organization, the VP unofficially aligned employees to strategic programs. Anyone left out was impacted by the layoff. IPF was not taken into consideration, but personal relationships with the VP.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wqy+16ur57Vt

Where is that 1.33 criteria from? Any source?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hia+16ur57Vt

Post a reply

: