After the fallout and chaos of ACT, I think they will more quietly put pressure on the BUs and project teams, with the 'basis' for cutting adjusted as needed to get the right numbers. Of course they ran into criticism in 2015 because of "stealth" layoffs and so decided to be "transparent" in 2016 with ACT instead. The bottom line is no business in the US is a charity (just ask HP and Carly) and with Oregon as an at-will state, you have a double jeopardy. In truth, if a company has to do layoffs, they have that right, with or without 'performance' as a reason. Given the changing tech environment and--honestly--some bad Intel management moves and decisions over several years, layoffs are probably still going to happen. While they simultaneously hire new/different talent. It wouldn't be entirely surprising if those new hires happen to be younger/lower salary or in the support teams, green badges. You might even see some things outsourced completely, who knows. Which is another common practice with big companies (think: food service, security, payroll, HR functions).