To those saying 1,000 cuts at Walmart HQ is a good thing, that it will get rid of some of the useless management that brings zero to the company and gets huge salaries in return for nothing, please don't be that naive.
Every corporate cut until now got rid of the employees on the lowest step of the ladder, while the useless leaches continued on uninterrupted.
It's been like that every time until now, I don't see why it would suddenly change. I do hope to be proven wrong, though.
I’ve often thought that about her. But anymore every executive has some sort of initiative they’re pushing. They don’t care about if they’re right or wrong. They only care about appearances. They want to be perceived as doing something. It doesn’t matter as much if it makes things better or worse.
You would think there is a careful strategy in all these senseless layoffs, but the truth of the matter is that it could very much be the fact that a new HR VP that was hired a year ago or so, curiously with B.S. her name (!), needs to justify the big money she’s making by laying off thousands of people, and replacing them with younger people. “See? They cost less!” That is, in essence, the sad -and stupid- truth.
They are going to outsource HR anyhow guys. That handwriting has been on the wall for a while. No sense in arguing a moot point.
btw, HR never lived by there own rules
sez the person from HR who shud take there own advice
HR might facilitate the displacement conversations. But I assure you they have 100’s of more gray hairs going through this because no one wants to deliver that news. They also only facilitate the process for who is selected to be impacted. Roles and people that are eliminated are up to the Business.
It s---s. I won’t sugar coat it. But if only you knew the 20 hour days HR is working to do as much as humanly possible behind the scenes in the interest of the Associate, you might have a different tune. They will never be able to tell you how hard they fight for the right things and you’ll continue to judge them.
Have you bothered to ask someone in HR today how confident they feel in their job or how many of their team members they have lost in the last two years. And oh... don’t forget the times that they spend all this energy to try and make this as painless as possible in light of the situation only to turn around and be displaced themselves.
So get off your high horse and realize that this is an outcome of the environment. Not any one person or team. Quit throwing blame and do something to make yourself relevant or prepare you for your next career.
Jeff gearhart told his VPs in a meeting last year that it was great to be in a room with so many high performing professionals, unfortunately not all of them will be around next year.
Jeff announced his retirement at the end of 2017 and I expect that several of his VPs will be gone in the next round.
the HR team is sh--e. tehy should get layed off
The problem is that they don’t understand what these different jobs do. So a lot of times they eliminate needed positions only to have to bring them back in another form. This is what happens when you have a bunch of leaders who don’t know how the company actually runs.
It’s not people that are being let go, it’s positions that are being eliminated and the people occupying those positions. That’s why “good” people are being displaced; they’re in positions the company has decided are no longer needed. Many people are able to find new positions within the company, something they wouldn’t be able to do if they were let go because they’re undesirable associates. If I were in charge I’d first get rid of the bottom 10%, then I’d eliminate positions no longer needed, and give the people displaced from eliminated positions first shot at the open positions vacated by eliminating the bottom 10%. That requires a little more strategic HR than we seem capable of executing. This approach achieves two goals, it gets rid of low performers and creates an opportunity to retain high performers.
@zzq, I think you read it wrong, I read it wrong too first time and felt outrage :-)
I think the original poster is referring to "lowest step on the ladder" to mean lower level associates (lower Band level). They go on to say, "while the useless leaches continued on uninterrupted." The last statement posits that the people who remained were a higher level, they got to stay yet are useless.
To your point, there have been a lot of good people let go, many were high performing who had a track record of success.
Not true. Not everyone has been a low performer that Has been let go. 90% or more of bauza cio org was let go and they all were not trash