All reporting in MSM regurgitate Bloomberg lead. Has there been any comment from Intel that this is going to happen?
I guess not denying it could be taken as confirmation.
Shame. Tough times.
5 replies (most recent on top)
Its the quite period. It will be announced during quarterly update.
Agree that random layoff would actually be the best for Intel. This company has a long history of bias and poor judgement. Corrupt decision makers will layoff good workers to protect their friends and family. Age and racial discrimination will also prevent the right people from being cut. A random culling will give Intel the best chance of actually cutting some real fat. The random data will also protect the company from any discrimination lawsuit.
VP of HR confirmed deep budget cuts this morning but didn’t give any specifics. She said be ready for anything.
VPs and directors have already met with some groups in SG&A functions and are now in damage control mode after getting a wrist slap from legal. They confirmed cuts to lower level staff because their hand was forced by the reports but refuse to offer details on the who/what/when until after earnings.
So... SG&A staff get to sit, stress, and wait for two more weeks to see if their livelihoods are going to be preserved or destroyed while still being expected to deliver in their roles. The smart/proactive ones who know their worth are already applying for the very few jobs still out there as we speak (or they saw this coming and jumped ship over the summer). The result of this will just be a distillation of incompetency as good people are let go (unlikely the decisions of who stays and goes will be performance based from what I'm gathering) and those that remain flee either now, or the moment the economy picks back up.
It's sad and frustrating; yet again, good people have to suffer the consequences of leadership being irresponsible with hiring. From my experience, it seems every 5 years or so the cycle repeats at Intel; grow to 120K during the good times expecting the growth is a "new paradigm" as opposed to a business cycle or demand pull in like with Covid, then cut to 100K in a major restructure to try something new when the down cycle comes back around, rinse and repeat ad-nauseum.
At least 50% should be laid off. Best way is random selection - including CEO - everyone is eligible to win.
Otherwise, the worst people decide to lay off the best people.
Another idea is to be inclusive in layoff.
e.g. at least 50% should be , ...