Thread regarding Cisco Systems Inc. layoffs

In the US one aspect of the definition of role is location. It is very hard to prove that people will never be relocated especially when there is explicit paperwork saying it is a job requirement. Personally I would jump at the opportunity to relocate from cold expensive BXB to warm, no state tax TX especially if Cisco was paying for it. Get there start looking for a new job while still being employed in an area where the tech industry is growing by leaps and bounds.

goal is to close boxboro campus in two years. Security is only bu growing and likely will be impacted within two years as well

Hard to feel sorry for bxb'ers whose only job for 9 - 20 years has been with mother cisco.

Wonder how good the retention package is, assuming there is one

It’s mildly interesting, but I’m going to take the money and not walk, but run. Can’t wait to start fresh somewhere new and put Cisco behind me (excluding all the great people I worked with). Not knowing all the legal costs that that option might entail only affirms my decision, but then that’s exactly what Cisco wants is someone like me to just sign.

IBM has done the same thing and apparently got hit by a massive lawsuit. But Cisco is known for doing their homework to avoid such things.

The idea is to let go of older and more expensive employees - who tend to live in the suburbs - and then hire younger people who will be paid less and who like to live in the big centers and afford them by sharing their houses/apartments with others.

I have heard also that the EVP's have been talking about needing "new blood" and hiring people from outside. That has always been Cisco's R&D strategy and it's now their talent strategy as well.

Perhaps some of the others who may have a harder time finding a new job of equal or higher level will challenge it. I plan on signing, but it seems like there is always a way to sue later (esp. in america the land of lawsuits)

It wouldn’t be the first time this has happened.

I have no idea about the law in the USA but, in other countries, the law is that the role is made redundant, not the person.

If that is the case here then your only option would be to not sign the waiver and then to claim for wrongful/constructive dismissal.

As I said, I saw this happen to a couple of G12s about two years ago. In the end, they were offered an enhanced settlement and decided to take the package because both found roles to go to.

Ironically, Cisco asked one of them to come back a year later. He refused.