Thread regarding Nike Inc. layoffs

Age, gender and race played a roll don’t be fooled

If all the layoffs since July through now ( the later lay offs will need to wait until Jan 1 to get this perspective)
See who filled your rolls...

You will see your age, gender and your race did play a part. Not your expertise, talent and value.

Nike tried to cover their tracks by releasing a disclosure letter listing roles & age of VP’s cut after the fact ( after your dear john letter/zoom lay-off) to cover their a**
I would suspect each band after that, that got cut, were presented with a similar letter ( but probably on time since they f’d up on that the first round)

Still, does it change the fact that you are “old” ( old bring over 40 btw)and white and lost your job for to make room for younger talent of more diverse backgrounds...
Does it make it okay? Sounds like reverse racism. Ageism

If you were a leader, future leader or an up and coming that lost your job to make room for the less experienced and paid less, but look better on paper by being of a more ethically diverse origin does that make it okay?
In order to Make a VP look better, make their org. Seem more “open minded” to align with the company’s message of inclusion?

Think not . It should be about ability, talent, team building, innovation

Not about race... and age.

So many teams are missing their leaders now.
So sad and short sighted

by
| 4737 views | | 13 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+17OopYgp

13 replies (most recent on top)

I’m happy to step aside and let this next generation take the reigns. We’re all still valuable. Go find that next opportunity!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @khhl+17OopYgp

Yes on the ageism....but with respect to D & I and non-white, non male talen,t look at the C-suite, key VP roles and the Board of Directors and you will continue to see under-representation. Not for lack of internal and external talent. It's still a e white patriarchy.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4cwp+17OopYgp

I got laid off at Nike way back in 2001 after 15 years while in my 40's. Was an E and severance was bare bones...unless you signed to agree not to sue for discrimination.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3tec+17OopYgp

How do you ask a question?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3yxy+17OopYgp

Does anyone have a link to the "There is a letter circulating from HR listing roles and age of those laid off round one and two. Look at it." ?!?

I can only find the WARN notices online from July 23 and Oct 29
https://ccwd.hecc.oregon.gov/Layoff/uploads/LOT7162/WARN%207162%20Nike%207.30.20.pdf

https://ccwd.hecc.oregon.gov/Layoff/uploads/LOT7162/WARN%207162%20Nike%20(3)%2011.2.20.pdf

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2jcy+17OopYgp

Actually it’s not BS.
Look at who has been laid off at VP and senior levels
This is about VP and senior roles- OP he /she/they are not talking about lower banding roles.

They who have been eliminated are older than 40. They are top tier pay . They are top in the game. They are a threat to their lateral counterparts in more digital roles. DH gave power to digital players to do this.
The excuse of merging into four categories.... the casualties are largely Caucasian. Though not all. That would be too obvious. The people who remained have been plugged in to cover the missing leadership shoes and are flailing.

It’s public. They had to report it. There is a letter circulating from HR listing roles and age of those laid off round one and two. Look at it.

Everyone should be treated equally.
Turns out, Nike screwed up this time and people are not wrong or whiney for putting it out there shining a light on the obvious.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2kjo+17OopYgp

"Rule 70" (Age + Years of Service) gets you at Nike. If your number adds up to 70+...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ltr+17OopYgp

I don’t know about discrimination but I saw mainly people in their fifties and forties getting laid off. Most were guys and not all were white. They were laid off from categories and account teams. Layoffs seemed to be skewed toward E but I also saw some U and S. None were low performers. So don’t plan on working at Nike until you retire. The layoffs will eventually get you.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xdx+17OopYgp

Ageism is ALWAYS a factor at Nike.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lgv+17OopYgp

OP, you are stating an opinion, obviously. Noting factual about since many younger than 40 and non-whites got laid off too.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ivf+17OopYgp

I know there is a lot of anger and frustration right now, but the moment DE&I related comments come in, that's usually (not always) when the commentary's validity starts to go sideways.

I lived at Nike a long time and some teams do need a correction to be more representative of the consumers they serve.

Sometimes when that correction happens it looks a certain way against a specific group but the comments don't call out that until that time it's been always favoring another group.

  1. e " Nike let so many men go from the womens apparel team, they are against men!!"

When in reality for decades, 80% of the womens apparel decisions were made by men and women had narrow opportunity to be a dominant leader (it's happens, but it's narrow).

And I'm a man calling this out.

Just an example that could be exposed on some many different levels (Gender, Ethnicity, Race, Etc.).

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qnu+17OopYgp

I’m not condemning minorities.
I’m condemning lay offs based on age gender and pay
Vs. legitimately being cut because of limited ability and limited talent and running failing teams

Understanding that Nike had to thin the herd, it’s apparent this is the Avenue they choose to take to fill roles

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xfz+17OopYgp

Well I’m black and got laid off, so maybe your criteria is not perfect. Feels like your condemning minorities and I know PLENTY that got laid off.

Carry on.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @whq+17OopYgp

Post a reply

: