So many people who haven't been performing at a reasonable for years/decades are dragging this company down. They haven't kept their skills fresh, and even when given the opportunity to train, turned it down.
And everyone acts all surprised when we lay off testers who were make 150ish with zero tech skills? We should have done that years ago.
Time to cut all the deadweight.
Had to search up "GolgaFrincham B Ark"....a very appropriate metaphor!
"Some of those laid off testers actually have quite good/relevant technical skills. Such are fluent in modern Python, Java, Linux command line, etc. It is a myth bordering on a lie that they did not accept the training offered to them. This may have been true for a some, but it certainly was not true for all of the testers who were laid off."
There's a comment on another thread about the Testers being laid off, and a speech by the Televangelist, and that other dude about how these folks did not keep up with their technical skills. The comment mentioned the one-sided nature of the speech and how the laid off folks did not have the opportunity to refute the comments about them.
That was an important comment because it blame-shifted the layoff problem onto the employees, rather than acknowledging long-term management failures.
Those employees could have been quite technical, diligent and effective in their roles. However, SAS does not reward people based on skill and effectiveness. They reward people based on fealty and politics. Those who were good at fealty and politics now make hiring and firing decisions, selecting primarily for those who will not show them up. This is one of the reasons why SAS cannot be saved. It's run by those on the "GolgaFrincham B Ark".
If you are working diligently thinking you are going to make a difference there, snap out of it! Spend your time updating your technical skills and networking like crazy elsewhere. Your future career may depend on those outside connections.
The comment does raise the larger issue about who should be considered as "permanent employ" vs "permanent outsource".
The comment wasn't about the folk(s) who rotate and manage the paintings.
Having people on staff like an artist is the definition of pi--ing away money.
There is a large collection of art on the walls of the buildings throughout campus, and having it does lend to a nice environment. Someone with the appropriate skills needs to make sure that paintings are properly cleaned, maintained, repaired, moved. But it makes sense that said person should be an outsourced art custodian (not picture painter), just like an outsourced landscape crew, outsourced cleaning crew, outsourced cafe staff, outsourced exercise staff, outsourced security, outsourced daycare, etc. Having all those people permanently on the payroll was great during decades of double digit profit growth. They all contributed during their time - but has that time passed now that being lean is a requirement for survival?
"Why is the art department safe?"
Pretty sure the prior comment about art department was sarcasm.
It's pretty frustrating to see people that do work towards the mission/focus of the company--efficiency/effectiveness of their work aside--getting laid off, only to see the company do articles on Inside SAS about the F---ing Artist in Residence. WTF?! Such a waste of money! At least the testers, consultants, developers, and salespeople do something of measurable value to the company. Having people on staff like an artist is the definition of pi--ing away money.
Why is the art department safe?
It’s true that SAS for many years practiced “corporate socialism” and that it is now coming home to roost. It’s been a strangely managed company in which hard work was not rewarded.
It’s false to say that those laid off were unwilling or unable to adapt. Some were, some weren’t. The ones I knew were willing and able, and certainly did not want to be laid off in their 50s.
It’s not only cruel, but stupid to make snarky comments about those laid off. Stupid, because all remaining will share their fate. Nobody will buy SAS except a company like Broadcom, or Oracle, or some other enterprise vendor who will immediately lay off 50%. That’s the endgame, whether or not an IPO happens first.
You think SAS needs more layoffs? You’ll get them.
... declining shape it is in ...
Re: snarky comments. There's truth, if you read between the lines. A notable contribution to SAS being in the shape is too much "corporate socialism".
SAS ' historical reluctance to cut people who either aren't making it individually, or have collectively been too long in roles that are no longer relevant to its success, along with not placing the most effective/stellar performers in a significantly higher salary tier is precisely why so much top talent is gone -- especially in R&D.
This is a management problem, starting at the top and descending through the management hierarchy at SAS. Also within "self-career management" that each individual is responsible for on their own (keeping your tech skills reasonably up-to-date and managing your life so you can be reasonably productive).
No one should be surprised the consequences have come to roost.
re: The entire PSD retail group was laid off today.
Seriously? How many employees was that?
I don't understand the mentality of doing nothing at work because you can get away with it. How boring. How soul destroying.
If you're there, why would you not put some effort in? You might find it's actually more interesting than doom scrolling all day...
I think the prior posts were addressing the roughly 10% of the workforce (likely just about anywhere), who don't have these principles in a work ethic
Also, if your "principles and work ethic", don't extend to growing your tech skills (unless retirement is days away) then you are simply in an echo chamber -- even if you share it with a few others who think and behave similarly.
The entire PSD retail group was laid off today.
Snarky comments are showing your true characters. These are real people good bad or ugly doesn't matter
"if you are waiting anxiously for that to happen, you aren't putting in your best effort each day."
Not true. If you have principles and a work ethic you'll give your best regardless of how long you hope to be here.
"
Seriously, if you were retirement age, or very near, and you were making 100-200k, and didn't really have to work and weren't really stressed, why wouldn't you stick around? It's free money
"
Sadly, this crowd su-ked up the salary dollars that could have been distributed to those who were working 45 to 60 hours a week to actually make a difference. Many of those folks moved to other tech companies and now work remotely for up to 2X and beyond what they were making at SAS.
This phenomena helps explain SAS' decline and the reason why Viya has not gained the traction that it could.
It's always been at least 10% who are just doing the bare minimum!
Based on this thread, it would be interesting to see just how many people are simply biding their time until they get laid off or offered a retirement package.
Definitely continuing to occupy an office until such an offer.
It's at least 10% who are just doing the bare minimum and are waiting for buyouts.
Seriously, if you were retirement age, or very near, and you were making 100-200k, and didn't really have to work and weren't really stressed, why wouldn't you stick around? It's free money.
SAS has always been extremely reluctant to fire, even at an individual level. It took my team nearly a year to fire someone who essentially just stopped working. It's a joke.
Those people who got laid off recently were senior/principal who got there solely because they stuck around. Yes, some of them were talented in their careers, but they weren't adapting and they were making principal engineering money with minimal qualifications.
Based on this thread, it would be interesting to see just how many people are simply biding their time until they get laid off or offered a retirement package. Are we talking 1% of the company or 10%? That's a lot of unproductive employees--face it; if you are waiting anxiously for that to happen, you aren't putting in your best effort each day.
"No shame in the current layoff package. Compare it to the retirement package and you'll take layoff every time. Not sure about the buyout, I think it has a couple extra benefits for those nearing 65..."
Is "buyout" different from retirement package? I've not heard of such.
From what I've heard, the VRBP's have been slightly better (some money for health insurance and, in fact, in 2018, they even got the previous year's bonus) that has been offered a few times. Not to mention, they got a Retiree badge and didn't suffer the shock of a sudden loss.
I guess it's possible in some cases that the payout for VRBP for those getting less than a full year of salary were slightly less than from the layoff policy. I didn't bother to try to do the math on that (and I don't remember the ranges of years -> months of salary).
Probably my ignorance, so apologies in advance :-)
No shame in the current layoff package. Compare it to the retirement package and you'll take layoff every time. Not sure about the buyout, I think it has a couple extra benefits for those nearing 65...
I am ready for a layoff or package. They seem to pay the same right now at least.
I'll be the first to admit that I'm overpaid given the skills that are now needed to propel SAS forward (skills I don't have). Hoping for a package, as a layoff would be kind of a sad ending to my career at a company that has been very good to me over 30+ years.
Unfortunately any attempt to “cut all the deadweight” will be like the testers’ layoff: “the wheat will be thrown out with the chaff” because management can’t tell the difference.
If you look at who got laid off, you’ll find that 80% were Senior or Principal level testers. The layoff was not based on ability or willingness to learn, but on salary ~~ a metric that management understands.
"$150K range"
Holy smokes!
The art department is safe.
"$150K range"
Holy smokes!
Some of those laid off testers actually have quite good/relevant technical skills. Such are fluent in modern Python, Java, Linux command line, etc. It is a myth bordering on a lie that they did not accept the training offered to them. This may have been true for a some, but it certainly was not true for all of the testers who were laid off.
That said, SAS generally has for a long time not required the level of fluid technical skills necessary to succeed elsewhere in modern tech. Some of this is due to SAS having built considerable proprietary internal build/testing infrastructure (infrastructure not modernized soon enough due to stodgy ineffective/inept R&D directors — many no longer with the company) to support MVA/TK (itself a once elegant architecture, but now aging quagmire of irrelevant technology with respect to the outside world) such that those possessing these skills were not required to scavenge for open source alternatives ubiquitous for at least the past decade.
SAS has had a long story, history with ineffective testers, who ranged on a continuum of technically inept “button-pushers” to manually running (and often restarting) bloated and ineffective, testing harnesses. Sadly, some “wheat got thrown out with the chaff” in the last round of layoffs. SAS lost some genuinely good testing professionals who understood the underlying technology (both the testing frameworks and the products they were testing) and were continuing to grow their skills.
But you are correct, a significant number were in the $150K range and > 55 years old. Ideal, low-hanging fruit in a quest to reduce salary expenses and/or free up budget for retaining or hiring more favorable candidates in other areas.