Something feels wrong here when we all get mid-year bonuses while more than 4000 of our work colleagues are walked. We all should give up our bonus and keep these folks. Or, let attrition do the job and let the VPs and above that contributed to the workforce misalignment give up their bonuses, not make these people pay the price. This really stinks.
9 replies (most recent on top)
F* that noise. Bruh, some people are good, some are bad. You think everyone is equal? No participation trophies here. Get another job fruit cake
I dont care, i need my bonus regardless
You believe LRs are a cost cutting measure? Then have a look at the ELT's salaries and RSU allocations. Look at the indecent amounts spent year after year on stock buy-back to keep investors pleased. You're just a pawn ready to be sacrificed on the altar of capitalism.
keep your hands off my bonus.
Stupid idea. This is capitalism and not some socialist venture. I earned my bonus and, if pulled, would walk to a company that would pay me what I’m worth.
How is it a paradox? If you can believe the ELT, this was not a cost-cutting measure to reduce OpEx and was (finally) a limited restructuring to target roles that were not needed any more. Cisco's Q1 & Q2 earnings calls were favorable, so bonuses were justified.
Giving up 50% of (on average) "7%" bonuses for 70K employees does not equate to keeping 4K employees at 100% salary. Using $100K salary for all 70K employees, that's roughly $250M saved by not paying out the mid-year bonus, but it costs $100M to keep those 4k employees for another year. Are we supposed to give up our year-end bonus too? And next year as well? How long do we keep giving up bonuses to keep them? That's not the question we should be asking ourselves.
If they don't fulfill needed roles because Cisco over hired, is cleaning out product lines, etc., then it's time to cut roles. But, if Cisco isn't cleaning house of redundant, no longer required, or over staffed roles, then why are we cutting jobs when we're posting profits? Cutting experienced workers to bring in cheaper, less experienced workers just to boost profits even higher is only good in the short term. When all the corporate knowledge leaves the company, who can provide the history of what that tool/server/process does and why is it needed? I've watched people get let go, and then a couple of yrs later, someone needs to upgrade/replace a server, or replace a process, and no one knows anything about it, so they do what they think is needed and suddenly backend stuff breaks and they spend a lot of time trying to figure out what was broken or not transferred from the old to the new and get it working again. But that expensive person that was let go a couple of years back could have prevented all that. Does the extra $10-30K saved that person was making offset the people hours spent fixing it, the people hours wasted because the tool/server/process was down and couldn't be used, and any customer costs?
But, I do believe that any year that the company has to do layoffs, limited restructuring, etc., the ELT and senior leadership should be giving up their bonuses, or getting much reduced versions thereof, for failing to lead the company correctly. Make them be more cautious with the decisions they make when they have "skin in the game".
If that means going back to having rankings and/or ratings performance reviews where the bottom performers are terminated to allow culling of bad employees because no company can succeed if they can't fire employees once hired, then so be it. As long as it's truly unsatisfactory performers. I don't think it's fair to cull the lowest 10% of a successful team where everyone is performing and only culling 10% of completely useless team full of non-performers.
But with Cisco's history of "limited restructuring" that gets implemented as a 5% cut across the board, and ends up targeting more expensive employees due to age and experience, it's pretty safe to assume that this LR is not much different than the ones that came before.
False. 10-12 hour workdays up to layoff. Retrain replacements located offshore.
Replacements can't do the work even with training and the company is screwed now. Execs don't know yet.
It was a targeted layoff to get rid of undesirables but not because of ability or effort. Demographic based layoff.
Rebalancing.
Those who got bonuses (everyone on pay-role) are need to run the company.
Those who walked out of the door are not needed anymore.
Keeping people by having them payed with our bonuses does not make sense. There is no work for them.
Attrition wouldn't work because the goal was to get rid of older workers and us born people.