#reorg

Is this a real simplification and an efficiency measure? Maybe? But it may as well be cover for offshoring to TII + Contractors. I do have tendency to be paranoid tho.

apparently there will be multiple going out. So hang in there if you get one in another wave it may just be a reorg. But I think the first wave is the 9-915 meeting, strong possibility that’s a lay off and anything later may be something else

I saw a few roles open up there? Whats the story is there a reorg in the chemical plant and those are reorg jobs or are those really positions where they have a demand?

Heard that hgas is on the way out? Anyone else hearing things?

GK isn’t messing around. J. Walker is out of Elavon and the CAO for PMI is leaving. Who’s next and what’s next for the hot mess that is all of payments inside of USB? Keep on transforming the bank GK 🤭

I’ve been through many, many layoffs in my time in retail (20 years) and just sharing what I’ve learned having been in various roles at various levels including IC and leadership (dir+). I have also had really good friends and partners in HR and ops finance over my career who have been at various levels of need to know (and they share with me of course 😏).
THIS IS NOT INTEL - I do not have any information about TGT. This is more so sharing facts rather than feelings.
Simply put, the fiscal calendar is important when making layoff decisions. Layoffs are planned for the immediate expenses (the severance packages, outplacement programs, health insurance premiums etc) and forecasted long term savings.
You may be asking why Q4, well it’s because this is when most retail companies make their season or year. And because most of the prep work for the season is done and everything is execute mode so it doesn’t have as much impact on the immediate business.
You budget for these layoffs (yes, budget. So a layoff this big has been coming for a while). Once they are reviewed and approved by the board, goal is to get them in before Q4 so you can chip away at the expense drag that the layoff causes through revenue generation. You also want to hit the expenses in the current quarter, especially if quarterly earnings report is going to be rough. You want to minimize the impact to the next quarter.
Then long term the savings reflect in the new fiscal year and helps at a time when sales are generally slower.
In the simplest form you spend now to hopefully recoup some, protect the next quarter, and then save later in the new year.
In terms of WHO is impacted, it’s not an easy exercise and certainly not one taken lightly. I know that’s not easy to hear because it’s much easier to blame the proverbial big bad wolf, but I assure you no one in the general sense wants to be in this position. no one wants mass layoffs. Everyone would love to hire and build out their teams and be offering promotions and bonuses all the time.
Unfortunately, in addition to the sh---y macro financial environment, some poor decision making, some external factors, and some decisions made when the company was thriving (over hiring, overspending or over indexing into certain teams and initiatives) leads to this.
I’m grossly oversimplifying how the company got here but just keeping it simple.
So back to WHO. Well at the highest level (think SVP+) you would receive notice of expense reduction efforts (either a dollar amount or %) and they would look at where to cut and save (travel, discretionary spend etc) and then when there’s no more to save there, you move on to the teams. You look at where the work is currently, where it’s needed, where teams are doing similar work, or maybe work that is no longer value added, and decide where it would make sense to cut folks, where it would make sense to consolidate teams (for example if you have 3 directors with one direct report each, would it make sense to combine a team and create a team of 6 with only one director) or where it makes sense to have both a dir and a sr dir based on complexity, leadership necessity, size of team or where it might make sense to only have one over the other. At the end of the day you just have to do what’s best with the hand you’re dealt while trying to minimize the impact to operations, workload and yes, culture.
Because at the end of the day, there is a day after layoffs and morale of the teams is crucial to how you move forward (it’s kind of ironic but I digress).
I would venture to say with all of this in mind, many leaders have been quietly not backfilling roles, losing jobs through attrition (people quit and role is not rehired) or asking their leaders if there’s any work that could be stopped, moving resources from other teams where support is needed more and away from teams where there is maybe fat to trim in order to prevent or at least mitigate big cuts. But alas, sometimes the only way out is through.
Alright so who knows what, now? VPs probably knew changes were coming, and maybe could influence who and what in a general sense. Based on the posts on here, they just found out officially this week and they probably had to sign strict NDAs.
It’s also possible they walk into Monday or Tuesday and get handed a list of who and what so as to not have anything leak beforehand.
As for the people impacted…
The goal is to do this as fairly as possible.
Is it possible favorites are played when deciding who to keep? Sure.
Is it possible top performers were never at risk of losing their jobs? Sure.
Is it possible bottom performers were an easy first decision? Sure.
Is it possible a leader sees a name on a list and says “absolutely not” and a role is miraculously found for them? Sure.
Is it possible a leader sees someone moving elsewhere and says “hey actually it makes sense for this other person to go over there based on their skill and for this person to stay here”? Sure.
Will someone say “hey I actually want to retire so take me out and save someone else”? Sure.
Is it possible some people know where the bodies are hidden and so they must be protected? Sure. (I’m mostly kidding, but I’ve definitely experienced layoffs where people are asking “how are they still here” and we joke they must have compelling enough black mail to stay lol)
Will some people be promoted if it makes sense to the new org? Sure.
Will some people be demoted if it means that’s the only way they can have a role? Sure.
Is this an opportunity to finally separate someone who is so toxic and has managed to dodge every bullet until now? Sure.
Will people and leaders be moved, lose work or inherit work? Sure.
Is it possible they cut too deep and ask someone to come back? Sure.
Is it possible they didn’t cut deep enough and need to do it again? Sure.
All of this or none of this could happen (in my experience, it’s usually the latter).
At the end of the day it’s going to come down to the work, what makes sense long term for the company, how much it’s going to cost to keep or separate someone and how everyone fits into the larger strategy.
“Good” and “bad” people will go. Just as well as “good” and “bad” people will stay.
We will know eventually what happened in the “post mortem” (aka because we piece it together in here lol).
Anyways, the point of all of this is information however relevant it may be to this situation. Knowledge is power and although it might not give pause to your anxiety, at least you’ll go into the week with some understanding.

They just fixed the "bug"—everyone now reports up to DE - through him DP P, JE, and JS alll who work in Human Resources.

Continuous engineering cuts (yeah opex cuts) . But don't worry, the 'CPO office overhead is still comfortably expanding

Another reorganization — new names, the same long-entrenched inept leadership.

No real changes. No products. Quality keeps sliding while the company waits for someone — anyone — to make sense of AI, since the so-called AI teams clearly can’t.

Directionless “AI strategy” built on vaporware, riddled with defects, and outsourced to contractors following Chinese-grade security practices — meaning none at all.

Welp sounds like work will be moving

COP will soon layoff significant numbers of hardworking and skilled personnel with significant institutional capacity and knowledge in its efforts to become as per McKinsey Focused Future Proof….
What does this new COP really look like and at what cost?
Or are the management consultants correct in that COP is rudderless and need of institutional retooling.

Last one for this year - another 5 to 7k to Let go, Majorly in US, Silent announcement will follow in the next few Business Days = Thanks Giving Reward for the Employees (Rember next 2 to 3 years there will be a Huge Reorg is going to happen, that will be beyond what we have seen this year, this is just tip off the Ice berg)

What is the latest with APLA and when will it disband?
I'm really concerned about CS and the role they will hold when this change takes effect?
Asking for a friend.
Thanks

Rumor has it that Toni doesn't know "what to do with all these sales people". Apparently unimpressed with the Juniper sales teams. Are you ready? Get ready!

The industry trend has been to flatten orgs and I imagine that is where Paramount is heading. Our new CPO will likely deploy some of the same strategies that were used to restructure Meta (where he came from). Worth a read for those falling under this part of the org.
https://about.fb.com/news/2023/03/mark-zuckerberg-meta-year-of-efficiency/

It’s been a literal bloodbath, with little to no official information, and people are reporting layoffs basically everywhere. The US seems to have been hit especially hard. This tells me we’ve been in worse shape than anyone thought, and that this round is just the beginning of more chaos. If the rumored numbers are true, there’s no coming back from this to anything even remotely resembling BD as we knew it.

When does Sanoke make first moves/changes specifically at ELT level

A month after the CDAI head got layered, nearly all of his directs were let go or moved elsewhere this week. We all saw it coming as this was a poorly run org that SVP never cared for.

I hear hints maybe some people that are in transition are not identifying themselves. I can understand there are business reasons both for and against this. But I also think maybe there is some fear, so it could be misunderstanding. Are there people who were in scope and already landed roles in the new organization, but will still transition out in 2026?

They’ve been doing small surgical cuts across teams for 1-2 years now. Mostly to move roles to India. Would they make cuts on those same teams again?

Is anyone having meaningful discussions about the SPS results? With organizational leadership as low as it is, the LT response continues to be something along the lines of, “well we’re going through a reorg so that’s why we’re rated low.” That’s been the message since 2020. Does anyone have any thoughts around how to get the message to land when there is an actual bad leader at either a VP or EVP level? Trying to brainstorm and ask for advice on how other people have tried to explain it. The notion that the SPS is our voice is gone ever since they removed the free text fields.

Hard to stay engaged with so many changes looming.

Bring on the layoffs and reorgs… been hearing rumors for several months and just ready to find out my path heading towards 2026. Best of luck everyone.

Just when you think things couldn’t get more confusing, two of the few competent and respected leaders in D&D, people who actually know the space and can manage people are reportedly leaving.

Meanwhile, if the rumor mill is right, a former consultant VP with limited direct experience is expanding their scope to oversee all of D&D.

How does someone go from “separation” status to suddenly being over all of technology, without the background or expertise for it?

Feels like we’re watching a slow-motion reorg that could spark a bigger exodus. Or maybe it’s strategic — put the least qualified person in charge and let attrition do the work.

that can only mean another round of cuts and layoffs.

And that’s not going to happen with this leadership. It really feels like they’ve completely lost touch with reality. The world is changing fast, but Chevron is moving forward on pure inertia, as if nothing around us is shifting. They’re doing this reorg like it’s business as usual, but it’s not. These decisions can have serious long-term consequences, not just for the company but for the many people who’ll be left without jobs. It’s frustrating watching leadership pretend everything is going according to plan, while there’s no real plan grounded in reality.

And things just keep getting worse, in every way imaginable. I wonder if they'll ever figure out that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?

Heard that’s the path forward, and it makes sense. Combine operations, leadership. Cut many many many many heads. Sure, it will rough for a while, but it’s all about the immediate savings. No one cares about 3 years from now, only the next qtr and the current gap to solve for. Painful decisions are what random new CEOs are all about.

Also, no more value! Redundant operations. It’s all consumer and business, all customer. We don’t need 10 different marketing teams, just one.

The goal is to cut people or make them quit. Every tactic that pushes employees out is cheaper than paying them to leave. Exxon has turned into an intricate matrix of exploitation and attrition pressures coming from every direction. No wonder it’s now the king of toxicity. And it’s not as if the job is worth going through the wringer for. A couple of years and done seems like the only reasonable way to deal with this hellhole of a company.

CNS going back under MN

How are others feeling now that we are 20 days into this “adventure”?

Today, my manager informed me that I’m part of the next round of actions, as my role is affected by the organizational health measures set by McKinsey. My team is being reassigned to different functional lines, and my manager mentioned that the RIF notification date is scheduled for 11/19. It appears that McKinsey’s recommendations are driving how our business is structured and managed, with decisions being made based on a set of data rather than the real work being done.

Tearing this bi--h down to the studs ya’ll. It ain’t the company it was 5 years ago. He-l, it’s not the company it was 5 months ago. Welcome to the soulless corporate su-k.

JC gets millions

https://www.tipranks.com/news/company-announcements/dell-awards-132-4m-stock-options-to-coo-clarke

Now can we stop with all the useless reorgs and focus on products instead?

https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k72ydbvw

I was told by our manager a reorg is comming by the end of the year. We were told some of us were moving to another site. This reorg is supposed to cut costs by reducing redundant positions. There is no talk of layoffs but movement of personnel to optimize operations. I believe it is another way of forcing more employees to leave or retire. I will retire instead of changing positions.

The new CEO, that's not change. It is the continuation of a plan. If l have seen this and lived it.

Meatball did the job that Blackrock commanded. He hollowed out the company, and outsourced much of it. The only thing not yet completed it the conversion of direct store to the Big 6 indirects. But that is coming.

The Checkmark has lost a lot of ground, and that was intentional. Next will be a massacre of senior managers and higher. Also.maybe a sell off of prepaid.

And then they will sell the cold, dead empty husk of the company to the highest bidders for scrap. We will be the AOL of telecommunications and we will be left to ponder "the good old days" as if we ever had them.

Should we give all of our money and resources to support a retail brand that has no awareness or subscribers - apparently. Should we reorg, then reorg, then reorg again - yes please. This company is a joke and we’re dead in the water.

Don’t apply for these roles you’ll hate it here.

Appears that there is a smaller reorg in CIG Canada. No specific details at this time.