Seeking clarity on how the cut target number was determined ($500M in expenses via layoffs and building closures). I understand the need for cuts, but the number sounds arbitrary though I'm sure it's not. Would like to know more about the rationale.
6 replies (most recent on top)
They threw a dart
None of this is well thought-out or has long-term vision - seems to me more desperation to please the board/shareholders at any cost in the next 2 quarters.
Listen to the July 18 recording where he says none of them have the answers...so instead ask your manager. Does not inspire confidence in this decision-making.
It is a suspiciously round number. Walt probably said a number out loud that sounded good, the board liked it and now the EC is furiously working backwards to do the math.
As indicated in the email, they felt there was an excess of like ~20% of people in the workforce that they didn't anticipate. I don't think they lay off 20%, probably more around 10% of the workforce.
I think the majority of people would like to know more rationale about many things. Don’t count on it. This is the new normal. There’s only us and them now.
If you have to ask, you’re not entitled to the information. Now get back up work.