They're about cost. The better paid you are, the higher your chances of making the list. So in reality, we're cutting the most skilled and competent people, which leaves teams far more crippled than the raw headcount numbers would suggest. Completely unsustainable.
5 replies (most recent on top)
Totally agree. My coworker in managed services exceeded expectations on his performance reviews year after year, yet was 58 and making 165K per year. After ten years of exceptional service for our customers, cut/chopped to save money with offshore resources that lack brain knowledge and can give honest feedback to customers. It's the new normal at Teradata.
The last 4 were about higher wages; as a manager, I had to lay off numerous top talent, specifically the highest-wage earners. That left me as the highest earner on the team in the last round, which finally caught up to me. So specifically, the 3 previous lay-offs were 100% about compensation.
Especially if they manage the higher paid staff out from a poor-performance perspective then they don't have to pay severance, which they will view as a win-win regardless of what they say. The place is on life-support now anyway so they might as well stretch things out as long as they can. A commenter in another post summed it up nicely that it's not sustainable. A few more code errors, more testing gaps, a couple more DBS restarts, a few more failed utility jobs, - not a big deal but this will likely backfire into getting the remaining customer base off the platform soon rather than later. What a slog this has become and feel really bad for the remaining already stretched thin/over-worked skeleton staff.
They replace the most experienced with cheap foreign Labor who are none too happy to become a slave. Pity the errors in the software are now becoming so bad as a result of cheap techs
Just wait for the brain drain when the VSP hits. Certain functions are going to grind to a halt i bet.