A few notes here, there is a ton of rumors about layoffs, I think a few media outlets that love to cover stuff at Starbucks headquarters had lengthy stories about layoffs. It boils down that 2% of folks at the HQ will be let go and there is no doubt about that. So, if we assume that up to 4K work in the corporate, we will see 80 of our peers let go. I am 100% percent sure they will focus on low performers or folks in areas that will not be developing or growing over years. So, firms like ours, they always have cuts and if your performance review is lower than the average, you might be in trouble. I also think we will go through another reorg and restructuring, this is not going to be the first time and over the next year we should give more SMs more off-the-floor time. This will mean that we need to hire another shift at pretty much every store and maybe to pay them more as they transition from SS to SfM roles. So, my theory for this, is that if we need to pay for this, they need to cut some of the supporting positions, which works because slack can be covered company-wide. I think, only think as I have no supporting facts here, that we are going to go through district consolidation – districts will become bigger with maybe up to 25 stores in each district (now we have 10 to 15). So, if this happens, there will be some redundancies on the district management level and you may see some folks cut there as well.
4 replies (most recent on top)
The layoffs already happened by mid-Jan and will continue until mid-Feb. I believe 2% is approx correct.
Wow to "100% percent sure they will focus on low performers or folks in areas that will not be developing or growing over years" by Anonymous60776. You really have no clue on the federal regulations on layoffs and the number effected at HQ do you?
That is not the way it works. Starbucks has to prove that it is not focusing on any one group (ethnic, age, etc). This causes a huge wacko adjustment and statistical analysis for any layoff and a lot of people get caught up in the layoff who shouldn't and a lot will get saved who shouldn't.
Additionally, as strategic focus changes they end up eliminating some strong performers who are not CURRENTLY in the area they are focusing on, because with a layoff you cannot let just some people apply internally and not others (because again, you might be discriminating).
No, Starbucks is doing this for OTHER reasons than eliminating "dead wood." They do it this way to get some accounting write offs. Otherwise in an "AT WILL" employment state, which Washington is, they can trim dead wood when ever they want, one employee at a time.
This is done in a layoff manner strictly to save money and for other reasons (including speed). It is significant (many hundreds, perhaps as high as 20%--unconfirmed). Starbucks is just another fast food company, focusing on keeping profits high. My only real fault against Starbucks is the hypocrisy of CLAIMING to be different. It is certainly a bit better for the hourly workers than McDonald's and it is a bit more creative, but bottom line it is no different. This should surprise no one.
I am backing this up with my 'honest word' - just kidding
I think the emphasis here is “no internal info to back this up” – so all my statements are solely mine, I haven’t heard this from management, etc. Good luck to all and let’s see how Starbucks manages 2015 layoffs.