Thread regarding Cisco Systems Inc. layoffs

Dumpster Fire of a Lie

Some things you should know within CX:

  • Managers (in CX) were told last minute who were affected. This was literally a handful of days before the 12th.
  • Managers had people chosen for them. "VPs" who have no Earthly clue who these people are or what they do chose names because of cost.
  • "Re-balance" is a lie. All kinds of groups were affected. Software, Security, AsAService, etc. Just an excuse to do an old-fashioned layoff.
  • Managers were told to be "accountable for your actions" when everyone was chosen for them...
  • Many newly converted contractors to FTE were let go as default choices, literally counter to the point of why you want to convert someone is to keep them at Cisco.... FIFO reasoning.
  • If you were let go, I wouldn't recommend you take a new role at Cisco. Unless you have to because you're the sole bread winner or the very least, never go back to CX.
  • CX makes up a large chunk of layoffs because upper " management" is too d-mb to understand innovation so they supplement with human labor then freak out when they get too expensive and not do anything new for the business.
  • I don't know how it is in other orgs in Cisco, but CX is a meat grinder. Every other year they get hit the hardest because they load up on labor instead of driving innovation.
  • Who ever is left in CX each layoff are either the lazy who are buddy-buddy with other lazy upper management or upper management .
by
| 4099 views | | 6 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kbWNqA1

6 replies (most recent on top)

Also in CX, a Director was impacted but none of their reports at all so this was more than a reorg. People were impacted at all levels, one or two, here and there. That’s not whole groups, that’s “you’re out of here.”

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ntd+1kbWNqA1

Happy Holidays!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hth+1kbWNqA1

The comment that:

Managers had people chosen for them. "VPs" who have no Earthly clue who these people are or what they do chose names because of cost.

is not accurate in all cases. Our VP had no say in who was let go, so it came from higher than him.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qxl+1kbWNqA1

Technology stops at the bottom two of layers at Cisco with heaps of dead wood management above contributing almost nothing to the success of the business. Chuck is so far removed from what makes technology tick and what it means to craft brilliant products that customers want to buy that is it any wonder that the numbers look bad?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @psw+1kbWNqA1

"I don't know how it is in other orgs in Cisco, but CX is a meat grinder"

I worked in CX, Marketing, Operations, IT, and Security. Every org has the same dysfunctional culture.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jfk+1kbWNqA1

CX should be a sweatshop, no one should be over GR8. Max salary for individual contributors should be capped at $85k/yr. Managers should have a minimum of 15 direct reports, cut out L2 mgrs, get rid of useless PM, BD and other bloat. Get rid of directors reporting to another director.
Collapse org chart to: IC--Mgr--Dir--VP--SVP--Chuckie
Similar org structure can be replicated across other BUs. This will eliminate a lot of the useless fat and deadwood paycheck collectors. Once that's all done, fire Chuckie, V2mama and all Chuckie's sidekicks.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @uha+1kbWNqA1

Post a reply

: