Regarding the mentioned "expected trim of the bottom 5 percent," that is not how layoffs at Cisco work nor have they ever.
Every single round of layoffs has cut some of the best people who have been with the company long enough to earn a decent pay. Every single time.
A few on the bottom might get trimmed simply to make sure there is no ground to claim age discrimination.
So if you know layoffs are coming, trust me that it will not be strictly or even predominantly the bottom 5 percent.
Easier solution….layoff all those sycophants who “reply all” to Emails. And if the original Email requested recipients to not “reply all” to an Email, as it was sent to a large distribution list, then they should be sacked for being incredibly stupid sycophants and not receive any pay out. That should wipe out a good truly useless 10% of headcount. If they need more volunteers for LR then start adding those Spark Spammers too. Productivity would improve instantly.
The 9 block evaluation at Cisco is determined by relationships. To think over wise is foolish.
To the fibinochi, we use our 9 block to rank engineering. It is way to help measure talents. Up moving depends on capabilities. But having friendships with power people is always wise.
Farts emulate from the bottom 5% of the large intestine.
Coincidence? I think not.
Layoffs at Cisco are based on your relationships. Make friendships with powerful people, and watch the salary increase/have job stability. Cisco is not a permanence based company.
A simple question: under the PEOPLE DEAL, there are no more annual reviews of employee's performance or goal-attainment.
THEREFORE, there is no logical way to stack-rank people.
THUS: it is impossible to even define " the bottom 5 %".
AD ABSURDUM: this thread is steaming cow-plop. Q.E.D.
1123581321 ...
Love, Fibonacci 🐮 💩
Layoffs at Cisco mostly about age. Being laid off at Cisco after 20+ years in September 2016, they would not give details about the profiles of people being laid off, including ages of the layoffees until we signed the severance agreement in which we agreed that Cisco was being fair, etc. and we had no greivance against Cisco and could not sue them. There was also a clause in there that we agreed not to recruit anyone from Cisco for 1 year and we agreed not to say anything negative about Cisco. When I first started working at Cisco, it was the best company I had ever worked at. For the first 5 or 6 years it was still the best. Come 2001 and the 'first layoff' (which was actually BS because they had been cutting groups that were bad acquisitions) things slowly but surely went downhill thereafter. Cutting/reducing benefits every year, layoffs, outsourcing and on and on...... Work there at your own risk. Employees over mid-40's start looking elsewhere.
This is common knowledge (or so I thought). The person who mentioned the bottom 5% is either daft or snarky.