I was quite shocked when I found out that some people were impacted for whom I would never have thought could be a target, considering their skills and knowledge.
It is impossible to know for sure, but it seems that the criteria for targets are not good at all.
If it is true that among those affected is a huge percentage of those who were some of the most knowledgeable employees, then this will have a very negative impact on the company in all sorts of hard-to-measure ways.
12 replies (most recent on top)
There are a few IT people in Plano who should be worried about getting sacked because they spend way too much time on literally playing in the cube aisles, taking two hour lunches, and flirting with married coworkers on IM.
The timing of this seems crueler than usual; right before the holidays (though no time is ever good if it affects you personally). Will the powers that be keep the massively large Purchase campus that’s been renovated numerous times but hardly anyone goes in there to work?
Definaltey seems this way. Since the first restructure I went through and everyone here on after its the ones that know the most that are gone. Soon no one will be left that have a clue. Maybe they should start taking out some senior leaders. Plant managers running plants right into the ground. Sad to see when you actually care for the company. Pepsi is full of weak se ior leaders who have gotten where they are by playing the game, not due to proven results.
I noticed in our group, anyone who was hourly, has a pension plan, and over 30 years old were all canned.
"People aren’t targeted. The most important thing for the PepsiCo side in a layoff is to meet enough legal metrics for diverse levels and ages so that they don’t get sued for discrimination."
You defined targeting. "We need to fire X of this gender and race, too, so we don't get sued" IS TARGETING.
"My boss got canned and HE was extremely valuable and knowledgeable. It's like Pepsi didn't even do any research, they just started firing people randomly."
Not randomly, and you answered your own question. In one function, we saw a competent (routinely 4/5) WM with 15 years laid off while the worst performer (2/3 at best) in the group keeps her job as a WF.
Leadership will tell you they were completely in the dark. It’s all a game. They will be the pawns in the next round.
My boss got canned and he was extremely valuable and knowledgeable. It's like Pepsi didn't even do any research, they just started firing people randomly.
People aren’t targeted. The most important thing for the PepsiCo side in a layoff is to meet enough legal metrics for diverse levels and ages so that they don’t get sued for discrimination.
Pepsico has lost knowledge it “couldn’t afford to lose” for a long time but it keeps on going. Everyone is replaceable so always be prepared for needing to look for a new opportunity.
Yes… behind closed doors they are called “blockers”.
In my group, that was not the case. We had a few people who had been in role for 6+ years that got cut. Had nothing to do with competency, as all three were strong performers relative to their peers. At issue was opening up the roles so that more junior people had a path upward since those impacted were filling spots and not moving.
To be honest those around me who were impacted I was not surprised about. I do think that for some departments at least there was some discussions among leadership on who was going.