If they keep this tempo of cuts there will be more managers than workers. I know many of us will say that they saved their asses at the expense of the workers, but I also think that this situation isn’t sustainable, especially for the company that claims it wants to cut costs. Could they be saving the managerial layoffs for last?
5 replies (most recent on top)
But even among the managers/non-agreement, the workers among them are being cut way more than the Senior Managers and higher. Not sure who’s doing the work in HQ now. A lot of managers in offices, while workers in cubicles have been walked out.
Management/Non-Agreement workers make up only about 10% of the overall workforce. And, yes, they are being reduced at an overall larger percentage than agreement workers. Just do the math and read the articles related to the number of cuts and where.
Most of the young field managers with talent have already quit anyway. Now it’s peope that got picked last for touch football.
My only reasoning is that if they lay managers off early, the managers will feel they have nothing to lose, so will start telling what they know or have c-appier morale that will make worker morale even worse (if that’s possible). Smiling managers, trying to put up a front won’t be such cheerleaders, so maybe lay them off at the end?
Why else would you keep the expensive people who aren’t doing the actual work?
Once everything is in place, look out...