Most of the people with marketable skills have realized by now that there are plenty of jobs with better pay, better work environment, and normal working hours - among other things - easily available in the current job market. Why wouldn't people jump at such opportunities when Cisco has shown again and again that it doesn't care about who walks away?
7 replies (most recent on top)
Cisco has ZERO obligation to care about who walks away. ...
I agree 100% with everything you said except that first statement. Cisco has a fiduciary obligation to its shareholders to be a profitable company. An inability to attract and retain top talent for the survival of the company runs counter to that responsibility. Granted, they don't need any one person as long as they can replace that person with another top talent. But when all the top talent leaves due to what's happening at the company, they can't replace you with top talent because other top talent is too smart to come to work for Cisco. Or needs too much compensation that drives up labor costs instead of cutting costs.
This is all just capitalism's race to the bottom. Just like planned obsolescence. Why make products that last decades when you can make them last just long enough to die when the warranty ends so you can sell replacements? In fact, if you're not selling replacements, you're not growing. It's one thing to develop improvements that would make me want to buy a newer model, but it's another thing to make me buy a newer model that only does the same old thing because my current model died.
YOU ARE REPLACEABLE.
I once worked in an org where an employee was having a few issues with management. At one point he mentioned the famous “but you cannot fire me” (given his unique skills). The manager replied “oh yes we can, and we can do it just to show you we can.”
They didn’t care that they would be stressed for a few months (and those stressed wouldn’t be the execs, but the other employees throwen into the fray with a “just sort it out”).
It was clear that execs never wanted to be put in the position where the employees thought they had any power. They were prepared to accept a bunch of pain to never allow that dynamic to arise.
Cisco has ZERO obligation to care about who walks away. Anyone who's been in the corporate world any time at all quickly realizes this. Employers owe you nothing. They don't care about you. What they do is value the work you do and how much you cost them to do it. Always rememeber no matter how much OT you work, how many weekends or family events you miss, how many Ata Boys you get from your boss in the end it doesn't matter YOU ARE REPLACEABLE. It's that easy.
Normal working hours - - pff please
I was a network engineer at Tesla from 2014-2017. I left for normal working hours. 40-50 hour weeks at Cisco is nothing. I don't mind those hours. Try working for a bat sh-t crazy genius CEO who demands perfection and you're working 70-90 hours a week. Biggest difference I've seen is at least Elon would actually help at the assembly lines and sleep in the office where I'm pretty certain Chuck isn't man enough to do the same.
Fortune magazine is a Thailand based magazine. It's not a legit "Best Places to Work" ranking.
Fortune sells "consulting services" to companies for an "improved" ranking.
Honestly I wonder how they manage to get best place to work in everytime.
Because the process to select the winner is corrupted by money.
Honestly I wonder how they manage to get best place to work in everytime.