How will they get rid of so many people with high ratings to meet their $ target? What justification is typically used? Eliminate the roles?I know this question seems stupidly obvious but I am curious what justification is used when they lay off. How do you justify axing those with high ratings? I guess we are just numbers on a spreadsheet.
6 replies (most recent on top)
if you think ratings are what saves you or if you think cfe isn't a joke then i've got oceanside property to sell you at whq
Most states are at will employment. Nike doesn't have to give ANY reason for laying off employees. The primary reason that they ever bother to give a reason is just to cover themselves for a risk of a discrimination lawsuit. Your performance, experience and skills can mean nothing depending on who is making the decisions. Maybe the only thing that really matters is whether you're known and well liked by an executive. To be fair, if you are delivering work that makes a VP look good and it's because you have skills, experience and the ability to perform, then yes, technically it helps, but in the end it's still about how much you've pleased those with the right titles.
I expect the Bay Area teams to be gutted and rehired in lower cost locations. It also makes sense from a business perspective. Bring those teams closer to WHQ where their stakeholders primarily reside. They were part of the hiring bo-m and Nike, like other companies, most likely overpaid for their talent.
Exactly same for me. Highly successful, but likely more expensive, so laid off ‘role eliminated’. Even though it was backfilled two weeks later with someone significantly less experienced.
@jsq+1qyHmxxD Sounds like exactly what happened in December. Highly successful reviews, produced results, didn’t spend my time kissing SVP a-s. still laid off. Older, but not with Nike tenure.
replaced by a younger, less experienced, more naïve people who spent their time building relationships with VPs and were promoted into my role a week after the layoff.
Highly successful rating folks easily sacked with “role elimination” scapegoat at 2-3 yr layoff cycles now the norm (and will be)…
Unfortunate but true.
This is politics and numbers that’s masterclass at Nike. People that make money (salary + stock options), have tenure, produce results, don’t kiss VP a** = good bye! You’re disposable, let’s replace with younger, naive and cheaper!
Really sad state of affairs and if you stick around and you’re good and speak up you’ll be a goner in the next round.