Thread regarding Verizon Communications Inc. layoffs

When you said Toxic, I first thought you worked in Value.

@OP Accountability? Who is responsible for the great 5G home internet failure. You know the one that was supposed to replace Fios and thin the union workforce. Total failure anyway you look at it

There is nothing new about vendors, it is about who bids cheaper and faster, that get selected. Then once vendor selected, its game of back door gifts and the respected leaders move along with SAVINGS, and as long as cheap vendors and their incompetent service keeps the NW- barely up, it’s all good. Dan get to say we SAVED Billions.

It’s Orchestration of cost saving, Network-service is not important, Dan headers here to get billions and retirements funding NOW, who cares afterwards.

Never seen hundreds UP votes, maybe someone finally found how to play AI like corporate downvotes that suddenly shows up on Real good posts

@af I'll say it. I have reported things and got similar responses as the other person. I do not understand how the investigated gets to determine the outcome of an investigation against them. The investigator needs to know more about the subject matter than the investigated to ensure a true and accurate outcome. This would be like a detective telling a suspect that their fingerprints were found at the scene of a crime and the suspect says "they're not mine" and it's left at that. Maybe that's why investigations are typically handled by third parties.

@af That was my first thought because I have.

Not all of these exact points but close. After well over a year of what they called an in depth investigation, they concluded, after interviewing senior leadership, that all of the concerns and evidence given were valid and system degradation was occurring. They said that in some cases they would look into correcting the issues reported but, overall, this was senior leadership's plan and while it doesn't look good, in the end, it is what they want. They thanked me for taking the time to report everything I knew and documented and asked me to report anything else I see that may be of concern.

I have no reason to doubt they looked into everything or that that was the actual decision from leadership.

I do doubt the effectiveness of interviewers who do not understand the problem who then interview the people that created the problem. It seems like they could easily be swayed to believe that there really isn't a problem or that the problem isn't as big as it looks.

"Oh, no that won't happen because if this flimflamdohickymajiggle. I think they just misunderstood what they were seeing. They don't fully understand how this system works with that system."

I think this because they explained what they were told as to why some things were undeniably occurring and while I do not know everything, I do know about those things and I know they were flat out lied to and didn't understand enough to know they were flat out lied to. They were blinded by ignorance.

So I sleep better knowing I tried to do the right thing but if asked to report it again and wait years to be told there was no there there... They can, respectfully, go pound sand.

I'll sit back and wait for areas of the network to drop or for any of the other possible outcomes to occur. Some very bad. IYKYK. Some here have discussed the causes for the effects we are seeing so I know I am not alone and probably not the only one to have tried a failed in reporting what needed to be be reported.

And I am still here much to my own disbelief. Things were alluded to in meetings where, had I responded to the questions, they would have known I was the one who reported it. Other people said offline "Those were weird things to ask" and I thought not really if you knew they were on a fishing trip. Sadly, others said they knew why they were asking and were relieved to know that someone had finally reported it because they weren't going to take the risk of loosing their jobs.

I think if I don't know the OP personally then I am probably close to their AO (area of operation).

Or the OP is senior leadership and they are still trying to figure who put them in such an awkward position. 😝

Spot on about the meetings. Half the people on these status calls haven't opened an IDE or looked at a raw log file in years. They just spend 10 minutes typing a prompt into Gemini or a cloud dashboard and then regurgitate it with corporate buzzwords to look like technical masterminds. It's pure performance art—with SDs and directors acting for their VPs and AVPs—while we do the actual heavy lifting.

You nailed it with the point on layoffs. The people making the terrible vendor choices are the exact same ones writing the strategy decks that upper management reads. Of course they aren't going to lay themselves off—they control the narrative. Meanwhile, engineers who actually push code to PROD and clean up their messes are the ones sweating during every round of cuts

Put this in the idea box from Alfonso.

100% agree. The double standard on accountability in this company is staggering. Management demands immediate results while actively tying our hands behind our backs with terrible vendor partnersh

Upvoting this for visibility. Dan and executive leadership need to see this. We can’t keep covering for external vendors who are clearly draining our budget while internal talent burns out. If HR or compliance isn't looking into these vendor selection patterns, they need to start now. We are losing market share because the foundation is rotting

Thank you for finally saying what everyone has been whispering about for years. The burnout is real, and the vendor situation has crossed from incompetent to deeply suspicious. I've personally lost count of how many weekends I've sacrificed fixing code and features that should have been solid out of the gate.

ethics team is on management’s side and we all know it. they look for excuses not to investigate.

Have you taken this to Ethics?