Is the goal to replace all older employees with younger and cheaper (or easier to control and get to do two jobs for the pay of one) workforce? Because from where I'm standing, that certainly seems to be the case. Does nobody at the top see all the problems that come with this approach (loss of institutional knowledge being one of them)?
15 replies (most recent on top)
Very good post by @6rqy+1ok4ymXk bump
You can only imagine the chaos inside Intel right now.
You see, for decades and decades Intel lived off huge margins from the x86 monopoly. The organization became very bloated. There are many redundant teams. There are even more useless processes and overhead.
Now the company bets the farm on a new strategy that requires more cash than it can generate. The core business is declining, both in terms of revenues and margins.
Now 30,000 heads have to be cut. However, the organization is fat like a diabetic. Worse yet, so many layers of management and nobody really knows what can and cannot be cut. Managers scream to HR they have already cut to the bone. This goes on and one.
It really is chaos and the spiral down will be very difficult to arrest.
Intel management is so thoroughly incompetent and delusional, they will end up firing the few talented and hard-working engineers left for political transgressions. The bloated mass of welfare recipients remaining are what management considers “indispensable”.
You can only imagine the chaos inside Intel right now.
You see, for decades and decade Intel lived off huge margins from the x86 monopoly. The organization became very bloated. There are many redundant teams. There are even more useless processes and overhead.
Now the company bets the farm on a new strategy that requires more cash than it can generate. The core business is declining, both in terms of revenues and margins.
Now 30,000 heads have to be cut. However, the organization is fat like a diabetic. Worse yet, so many layers of management and nobody really knows what can and cannot be cut. Managers scream to HR they have already cut to the bone. This goes on and one.
It really is chaos and the spiral down will be very difficult to arrest.
Some young people today have negative behaviors (“quiet quitting”, excessive time on their phone, etc.), so there is risk in discarding someone with institutional knowledge and a known track record and bringing in someone who lacks those.
Having said that, replacements of any kind may become less likely moving forward than Intel simply cutting people — old and young alike.
Wow! With folks like this in my company, I’ll take the young people!
The only exception to this rule is DEIs. They stay no matter what.
Spot on. This isn't complicated.
The reality is that, as you go through your career you have years and years of growing salary...
At the same time, older people just don't have the same level of energy or motivation to work their a-s off for the man.
Young, eager engineers come out and even though they have little experience they gain productivity quickly.
So naturally companies get rid of the older workers who are paid much more then the younger workers.
Nobody likes to admit it but this is all true. Intel will say, 'that person's job role was eliminated'. That gives them the cover to get rid of the older workers. Always been that way. If you are an engineer don't assume you will have a job after age 45-50. Save everything you can and be prepared to lose your job sooner then you may want to.
In the eyes of your executive overlords a head is a head. Even if 1 head does the work of 5 people. Companies are terrible at protecting and nurturing talent. Intel is no exception. If anything, too many worthless executive bureaucrats clinging to their crowns bringing no value while leeching from the company. Why should someone get paid $500,000 to make a power point each quarter about nothing? It never ceases to amaze me how many words are spoken and yet they contain no substance. Corporate double speak ftw.
For many older workers it's called the Rule of 75 or something similar. You're eligible to retire so they will help you to move that along. Has nothing to do with performance or DEI.
That has always been the case.
The recent problem is that the younger ones are not better and not easier to control. Managers bring them in in order for you guys to cancel one another so that he doesn't have to make hard decisions. Now the company ends up with all there cancelled warm bodies hanging around drawing pay. LOL.
Ask HR for the figures, DEIs are significantly less likely to get laid off while older, white non-DEIs are more likely to be laid off.
This will be tested in the courts.
Of course it is. Been the case since the original ACT.
- Get rid of the most expensive employees (Non VP and above only)
- If they are white, awesome.
- If they are white and male PERFECT.
- Then try to bring back some as contractors 6 months later, because DUH.
What is institutional knowelledge and why is important?
cool story bruh
Yes and Yes