Thread regarding Qualcomm Inc. layoffs

The number of directors in QCT is appalling... Who is doing all the work..if there are sooo many directors "directing" (?)... The title is just a joke and a testament to how good the person is at sucking up (not networking mind you, but plainly sucking up...).... Even more so if you see a relatively young person with a few years of work experience holding this title.

@187856: The title might be a correct index 20 yrs ago but it is not anymore. And 187385 is correct, it becomes a retention tool and a tool to consume engineers' energy to compete in wrong directions (ex: generate garbage emails/report and do lots of redundant status report/update). Agree with that some of engineers with Principle/VP titles are having very solid background. However, QCOM destroys the credit of this system by its own hand with title inflation. And turns the title become joke. Hence the new 0 RSU/Bonus/Merit policy turns the title become punishment.

1. I cannot speak for others but I am not HR. I am an engineer that worked hard at Qualcomm for over 20 years, moving up through the technical ranks. What I said is not some HR quote. I am sorry if QCT has destroyed the original intention of the titles. I recall the last VP of Technology promotion (not QCT) and how long it took and how much evidence it required. The promotion was discussed and had to be accepted across the company. We had standards.

Talk about groups top heavy with directors...my group has 2 directors. After 11/20 each of them will only have 2 reports. I thought the whole concept of this GTFO exercise was to reduce costs? Apparently not since both of them make well over 6 figures. 2 directors with 4 reports between them. That is b.s.

rE: 187215. "I am touchy about the technical titles. These titles were created because of hard working, technically excellent engineer who as of early 2015 is still at Qualcomm. Becoming a Principle Engineer was hard. Becoming a VP of Technology was rare. Becoming a SVP of Technology was all but impossible. To get these titles, you had to have some serious skills and you had to make these skills of great benefit to Qualcomm."

said every HR person I've run into during my tenure at the Q. Good to know you're ALL consistent.

There is lot of hard working people at qualcomm, but there is also lot people who have their Title because they the have some family or friendship with upper mangement. If I was in management I will hire my girlfriend + an Idian to do the actual work while we have fun.

187420: Recall how S&M was retained.

I thought Stock Options and RSUs were for retention, and salary, bonus and title were for performance.

QC management has turn titles into a retention tools, and that goes all the way to the top. Once this happens, there is no value in the titles. In the military there is one Captain of a ship. There is no such thing as Co-captains, and, there is no such thing as a captain of a ghost ship. Only Captain Hook can be a captain of a ghost ship.

1. I am touchy about the technical titles. These titles were created because of hard working, technically excellent engineer who as of early 2015 is still at Qualcomm. Becoming a Principle Engineer was hard. Becoming a VP of Technology was rare. Becoming a SVP of Technology was all but impossible. To get these titles, you had to have some serious skills and you had to make these skills of great benefit to Qualcomm.

It is obvious Q hiring and promotion practices have gone way downhill over the past 10 or so years. Having Q on your resume is becoming more of an asset than a liability esp if you are with QCT. There are better companies out there with hard working, more technically proficient engineers out there, and hiring managers know this.

@ Anonymous187185

Let me be clear here, is not all Principal but there are many many many who hold this tittle without any technical background, neither experience. The principals I am referring to are friends of Directors or people who hold senior staff manager titles for 20+ years, these guys are clueless and are adding a burden to QCT.

187131, you are making completely incorrect assumptions. I hope that is not how you do development. If it is, then I hope you are either on a PIP or leaving Qualcomm on 11/20/2015. I was a Principal Engineer back when Qualcomm engineering was a single organization. I worked on different different different projects over the years, including and ASIC. However, I was never part of QCT. I have had both technical titles and line management titles. I left Qualcomm with a technical title higher than Principal Engineer. In my time at Qualcomm I led and was part of teams that developed products and technologies that were of great benefit to Qualcomm and projects that failed to make it to market for one reason or another. Overall, I am proud of my time at Qualcomm.

@Anonymous186943

You are one of those Principal losers that got the title because you waste 20 years at QCT.....you are in the next list

Cool story bro

Chill bro

186935, you are making yourself look like a disaster. Principal Engineer is a technical title not a line management title. There is no reason for a Principal Engineer to have line management reports. Time for you to go.

You forgot all Principal which is the same failure....one report, no reports, this is a disaster.....time to go

You idiots not anyone can be a director... You have to through initiation first...hahaha... You have to give one of the jacobs a BJ.

You idiots not anyone can be a director... You have to through initiation first...hahaha... You have to give one of the jacobs a BJ.

you forgot directors with NO reports. It's a thing.

So funny HAHAHA