You are correct, looking at the cuts already made in P&A, SR, L&D, etc... the cuts are about 20% across the board.
Do we know if this trend will continue throughout the company? Twenty percent of 70k is 14k, is State Farm really going to cut that many people in one go? Sounds way up there.
If you look at the raw numbers for Systems employees at Corp, it's about 25%. Maybe some will find other, lower paying jobs, but that doesn't change the calc for jobs lost.
Props to the Aliens reference below. Had me laughing my a** off.
@S9X2oO7-1fnh - Glad things are working out for some in your area, I really am. Our area is not CAT prone and the affected reps won't be putting in for the weather jobs as they would be gone most of the time. Also, figuring in TMs (going from 3 down to one), the trainer, re-inspector & SIU person, we are going to be down 37.5% in my area. And, with the constant use of externals over the past year, there is a lot of anxiety about how many more claims positions will be cut the next round.
I suggest they nuke the site from orbit.
It's the only way to be sure.
The amount of cuts you are stating for fire is misleading. Yes, 3000+/- go the notification, but there are many jobs available in claims which will be taken by these people. For example, the state I am in, had 22 people on the list, but there are 8 prox jobs they will be applying for. This means a net loss of 14 jobs....not 22. After all said and done, with cat jobs, etc, I would guess there would be 1500 jobs gone which would work out to be about 19% total.
20% reduction in all SF employees would be a start? That's pretty grim and seems like a wild guess on your part
The layoffs are executed as rushed and crudely as CDE.
It is worse than what OP is posting. Field proximity is going down from 8000 to +/- 5000, which is close to 38%. An as to the 1st reply, you are giving current leadership a lot of credit thinking that they could come up with anything other than a simplistic strategy, let alone execute it. We are in a death spiral and they have to cut jobs. 20% would just be a start.
I doubt the strategy is so simplistic. It would be foolish to adhere to something like that without considering any other factors. It probably just lines up that way