I'm almost hoping to be laid off while severance is still somewhat decent. I've been hearing horror stories from friends who work at other companies where people with 10+ years would get four weeks and that's it. What are the chances something like that could happen at Cisco?
12 replies (most recent on top)
"Cisco severance isn't bad if you are young and job hoping, but they really sc--w the older employees by not offering any early retirement."
Have you ever applied to jobs unemployed with a few legacy Cisco projects under your belt? They sc--w over the young employees as well.
I've been hearing horror stories from friends who work at other companies where people with 10+ years would get four weeks and that's it.
I've worked at several large companies as well as some small one's that basically had the standard practice of 2-weeks pay in-lieu of notice, an additional 2-weeks pay plus 1-week of severance for every year of service if you signed the no-fault agreement holding the company not liable for terminating you. Until I got to Cisco and then Twitter/social media posts sharing their termination packages, that's what I though a normal package was.
What are the chances something like that could happen at Cisco?
I'd say it's unlikely until Cisco really starts hurting financially. They offer a great package to keep people from suing them or taking them to arbitration. Notice that the package is 30-days pay while you're still an employee but not working plus 30-days pay in-lieu of notice to match the 60-day notice that CA requires and all the rest is contingent on you signing the no-fault agreement.
As @srf+1pHsRfPj said, the first early retirement package was a disaster because many very qualified people left. I know a Sr Mgr had just gotten promoted between the time the 2011 ER was announced and when it took effect and he managed to take the retirement at his new Director pay. Another manager who'd just joined the company a couple of years earlier, but the math of being over 50 and age plus years of service being greater than 55 made him eligible for the ER while a guy under that manager had been a college hire back in the mid '90's and had 17 yrs w/ the company wasn't eligible because he was under 50. He got LR'd a couple of months after the ER date and he was pi---d!
At least Cisco was smarter the next time around in the '20's with the next ER by not letting anyone who'd joined, or been promoted, in the previous year be eligible for the ER package as well as making the minimum # of years of service 5 yrs.
The original thread is from Cisco HR.
Cisco had across the board pay cuts for SEs a few years ago.
So who is going to inform OP that in the past companies like HP have had pay cuts across the board, and that some posters on TheLayoff.com have asked for this to avoid being laid off?
Wow, in your low intelligence you sure read a lot into a comment.
No, unlike you I wasn't born this morning and have seen years of people coming here demanding that they be given the world for their "sacrifice" of showing up to do a poor job starting at 6 digits a year for kids out of college, although it was funny seeing people who thought a million dollars is still a lot of money.
The early retirement packages were disasters in that anyone who qualified and felt they could get a job overnight took the package and were working somewhere else the following Monday because unlike many Cisco employees many of those taking ER were useful. This means Cisco was paying a significant premium to give away their best employees, often to their competitors. Low intelligence is thinking this is a good business decision.
Not sure how but have at it 3rd shift ops guy.
Project much? Unlike you, I like many received real value through Cisco's stock and are good enough that trashing the stock is counterproductive and getting laid off with months more severance than it would take to get a new job is literally a bonus. If you were competent you'd already see the win win.
And seriously, what kind of large international companies with worldwide offices have full time 3rd shift staff for anything that can be done remotely with a few local first shifters on call in emergencies when a physical presence is needed? The few times I've needed to use the TAC they had no trouble handing things off to offices in different time zones.
It's absurd that you are “worried” about a future severance. Cisco is not a non-profit and legally (in the US) not required to give you anything. Let me guess - you are middle-aged and have saved very little in your 401k. Maybe Cisco will help you with that on your way out? SMH.
- "Wish they would offer what they did the very first early retirement package." then mo--n responds with "Why don't you get together with that person saying everyone who is laid off after being at Cisco for five years deserves $1M regardless of their uselessness"
Wow, in your low intelligence you sure read a lot into a comment. Not sure how but have at it 3rd shift ops guy.
Wish they would offer what they did the very first early retirement package.
Why don't you get together with that person saying everyone who is laid off after being at Cisco for five years deserves $1M regardless of their uselessness. The best you could do not that long ago was a gold watch. It's up to you to earn money, spend wisely and invest the rest. You are owed nothing more.
Cisco might be a good company in the past about 20 years ago. Current Cisco is at surviving mode.
Worry about severance? by the time you finish worrying about your severance package, Cisco might not even around anymore.
Cloud and other vendors all sharing the same pie with Cisco
Chuckie had to keep tagged Jensen Huang's name 4 times during earnings call last week, fooling investors Cisco is doing AI. Jensen Huang is a 50 billion dollar man has his own invention of AI company. Chuckie is a 100 million man running a networking-in-general company does not have anything to do with AI
Staging powerpoint decks and tagging along with names from AI leaders will not making Cisco a better company
Cisco severance isn't bad if you are young and job hoping, but they really sc--w the older employees by not offering any early retirement. We really are discriminating, yet we do it in a way that is legal. It is sad we don't honor those who did so much for us. What a lousy way to end your career.
Did you ever see a retirement party for someone in the LR? Never!!! It is because nobody wants to face them and admit what we just did to them. We say we are all about caring for people, yet our actions show we don't.