Does this make sense. In this specific order... I think they are following this logic when deciding who to cut. Feel free to add or correct me.
- HR issues, complaints, conflcts, or employees seen as "problems"
- Low perormersperformance
- employees hated by their manager
- Duplicate / redundant positions
- Teams or functions being consolidated / merged
- Mgmt layers (cut during reorgs)
- Managers with low direct-report counts (always a target)
- Employees on sh-t/canceled/deprioritized projects
- Role not aligned to corp strategy
- Remote folks
- High-cost areas / highly comped peeps
- Older / highly compensated employees
- Recent hires (especially if their teams overhired)
- Employees w/no skills aligned with newer priority (hey AI)
- %-based cuts applied across orgs or mgmt hierarchies
- Some get selected because canning them through a RIF is easier than managing a performance exit
- Remaining selections needed to meet the final number needed