Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

Frustrated bitter long time employees of Intel with no industry knowledge or skills to match with their repeat monkey word and powerpoint .... many URMs were not rejects. We are successful in our careers unlike you and highly employable outside Intel unlike you ..we were doing very well in our previous job in a better company than Intel. It was Intel that misrepresented themselves to make us resign from a perfectly good conditions ... to come to this dump called Intel ... by paying us 30% salary above average, huge signing bonus, gifts, etc. Now that we are here, only choice is to stay for long enough to make our resume and tenure at Intel look decent. Don't worry, and get over jealousy of us .... we will be gone to a greater place sooner than later given the choices we have...while you continue to rot in toxic environment of Intel with no options and no one willing to hire Intel staff.

add - mistake to hire them

Agreed , definitely pay is at the lower end of scale for the india folk and quite deserved. Now in hindsight I think all would agree was a mistake and hence now a huge change of direction. Happy Memorial Day fellow Americans ! USA always #1 !!!

@HDFsmhW-pue Qualcomm Inc., Wind River Systems Inc., Advanced Micro Devices Inc., Altera Corp., ARM Holdings PLC ADS, Atmel Corp., Broadcom Corp., Cavium Networks Inc., Dataram Corp., Digi International Inc., Applied Materials Inc., Jabil Circuit Inc., NVIDIA Corp., HP (Hewlett-Packard), Texas Instruments Inc., Marvell Technology Group Ltd., Micron Technology Inc., PMC-Sierra Inc., SanDisk Corp., Avnet Inc., Imperva Inc., Unisys Corp., United Microelectronics Corp., McAfee just to name the tech companies.

1sai actually the opposite is true. URMs come to Intel at a higher average salary/bonus/grade because we are competing with other companies that also have similar regressive quotas for special skin colors.

As a real engineer - not a fake and bake india clone, I would gather it is

due to pay. They can pay these people less, plain and simple

Is there a quota for baseball, football, or other sports. Do we make sure all ethnic groups are represented and paid equally? What professional sports team could win with such a stupid guideline!

I am all for equal opportunity and equal pay for equal performance. But anything for else is just stupid and insulting to everyone!!

So then why only Intel is doing it by force and against merits. No other company is succumbing to government media pressure. It does not make sense, all theories without sound logic.

likely due to the OMB partnership with the EEOC who are going to collect gender and race data from large corporations beginning September 2016, if there is a substantial difference in pay between race/gender in composition of the corporation then a lawsuit will be filed and the companies will be named publicly - Intel does not want this type of exposure.

"Companies would report the salary data on a form they submit annually to the EEOC. On the updated form, employers would have to identify the race and gender of employees and report their W-2 earnings for a 12-month period, including tips, taxable benefits and bonuses."

"Detractors say the policy change would create an unnecessary government overreach. Roughly 67,000 employers would have to take on the extra paperwork."

Intel leadership saw the writing on the wall years ago, they're being proactive so as to be able to provide this data and not be targeted by the government, mitigating unnecessary exposure. The government initiatives began in 2010 and gained momentum in 2012. Articles were published in January outlining the plan of action and possible consequences for companies who do not immediately begin demonstrating equality in their labor force composition....people should have put two and two together by now...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/29/obama-targets-gender-pay-gap-with-plan-to-collect-salary-data-from-big-businesses/

OP, you're trying to find logical reasons for affirmative action, political correctness, and basically liberalism of the past 15 or so years. You can stop trying, you won't find it.

Agree with @rvv, the really good URM people are now being overshadowed by this and people are starting to assume that URM = lowered bar. It's not true in most cases, but thank BK for this too.

Finally, lol @gvz, using a third world country (India) as some sort of proof that socialism works. It's like using Murthy to prove that diets work.

Have you actually interviewed URM candidates or worked with URM? Are you a good judge of talents?

Nothing could be more demoralizing for URM than BK's overt URM. We are clearly encouraged to find candidates that "can" and help meet the "numbers" versus the BEST candidates irrespective of race or sex. Now how is that going to make the company more agile and better?

I know some really good TF and URM but any promo or other thing will now be judged as just favoritism, if I was a URM I'd avoid the place or get out as that is too toxic and environment.

Intel really is a bad place. Hope to get out soon enough.

The best URM numbers can't hide the fact his larger strategy for intel is going to fail.

It appears to me that BK is trying to garner favor with the current political winds. Who knows maybe he feels there is a career in politics next. Obviously hiring less than the best candidates is not good for intel. I don't care how HR tries to spin it.

URM hire does not count towards headcount for a year, so managers facing resource crunch are forced to hire URM's. In focal, number of promo/E/O must correspond to the percentage of URM's and slow/SL4/SL5 must not exceed corresponding percentage of URM. Meaning, first you are forced to hire below average URM. In focal, even if all of them are at bottom, you must promo 10% of them and cannot give SL4/SL5 to more than 10% of them. Remember, because of additional URM heads, total team size is bigger, and hence to meet 15% distribution of SL4/SL5, some non-URM's, who may be well above URMs must to be sacrificed. So much about talks of meritocracy.

Liberalism that's the reason. It's a disease and has worked so well for almost 8 years in the USA...

Oh Wait!

IDC is exempted from HR diversity requirement. All boils down to how strong and competent the leader of the org is

To "-qjl" your rationale does not make sense as well as there must be someone above policy and making sure system is not gamed and it is all sum positive game for Intel and therefore for all owners and employees.

I see incompetent URM surviving multiple focal times and from outside looks like protected species by some mystery or not

By hiring a URM employee, hiring-manager gets a free worker for the first year. HR Diversity suplements it through a special Intel fund. Therefore there is no cost to the hiring organization. Hiring managers, therefore, do not lose by hiring a person that may or not be best fit and most certainly hire without picking or chosing. Problem begins as first focal or the end of employee's first year nears end.

Reply to "-asu", benefit from diversity is very questionable and arguable although in some cases I could see some only usually small benefit that could and should never push for hiring not the best candidate. That is why all the propaganda in the news and news peer pressure did not end up changing much in almost all companies. This problem can not be solved artificially and the only way to start addressing is at the root, which is school time.

By the way, read about history of IQ measurements and how it was used by big companies embedded in interviewing questions, then how it was ordered to be stopped and today nobody does it in any way that can be proven in the court. History of this might be useful.

Very simple they do not deliver and hiring managers cover them covering their incompetence and growing their group. There are whole teams with consistent low grade skills who do not deliver anything or close to that.

The benefits resulted from diversity is the rationale. How it is actually carried out is a different issue. Hiring less qualified minority is not necessarily the intention, but it would happen when you have quota to meet. The stupidity is to think that you can have both ways - meeting the unrealistic quota and hiring highly qualified people.

Bad skills? Do they do their job? Deliver on time? I guess yes. If not, how are they still on the job? Even if their manager doesn't fire them who is doing the work on time? If you're weak you need someone to CYA, but there's work that needs to be delivered. If it doesn't matter who approved of the hiring and who doesn't care about deliverables?

Some of the caucasian (white) old (55+ year of age) women recently (end of 2014 - 2015) hired into Intel high grades via diversity program were ex-Intel that were previously gotten rid off. After a year of spending their cash & working/vacationing elsewhere... they came back to Intel without having to repay their package.