Investing General Discussion

Haus

<Silver Donator>
12,430
48,368
Paramount cutting 15% of the workforce. I am noticing a trend.
I'm seeing a trend in some companies I work with...
  1. Calling a bunch of managers to come to corporate
  2. mid tier and higher managers have to sign an internal NDA
  3. Start the 2-4 week countdown timer to re-org/layoffs
 
  • 1Worf
Reactions: 1 user

The_Black_Log Foler

PalsCo CEO - Stock Pals | Pantheon Pals
<Gold Donor>
46,392
42,166
Honestly companies need to go back to cutting 10% of their regular office-workers (as in non-manufacturing/ops/logistics type people) every few years.
This is a retarded take and is a great way to drive away top tier talent.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

The_Black_Log Foler

PalsCo CEO - Stock Pals | Pantheon Pals
<Gold Donor>
46,392
42,166
That’s healthy to do if you replace them just to churn the workforce and get new blood in. Not so healthy when you cut and never replace.
Not really. I’ve seen this at companies that have unregretted attrition rates. It’s like using a chainsaw for hand surgery - you’re gonna lose some good fingers in the process. From the engineering perspective I have zero idea how it makes sense financially when it’s an annual thing and it takes a company 6 months to spin up an engineer to be productive.

Can’t really speak to job roles outside of engineering though.
 

Gravel

Mr. Poopybutthole
38,345
124,177
It also leads to overworking your best employees who have to then cover all the work of everyone you let go. Even if they were only doing 10% of the work, that's 10% that now falls on the rest.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Truth!
Reactions: 2 users

TomServo

<Bronze Donator>
6,721
9,178
I'm seeing a trend in some companies I work with...
  1. Calling a bunch of managers to come to corporate
  2. mid tier and higher managers have to sign an internal NDA
  3. Start the 2-4 week countdown timer to re-org/layoffs
Why the fuck did you have to say this. Being asked to sign a NDA for some super secret project next week
 
  • 1Worf
  • 1Thoughts & Prayers
Reactions: 1 users

Haus

<Silver Donator>
12,430
48,368
Why the fuck did you have to say this. Being asked to sign a NDA for some super secret project next week
Justin Timberlake Idk GIF

I don't make the rules sir....
 
  • 5Worf
Reactions: 4 users

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,859
23,120
It also leads to overworking your best employees who have to then cover all the work of everyone you let go. Even if they were only doing 10% of the work, that's 10% that now falls on the rest.
The bottom 10% of general officer workers are never doing 10% of the total work. They're doing like 2-5% tops.

Remember how pareto rules work.
 
  • 1Moron
Reactions: 1 user

Palum

what Suineg set it to
25,605
38,759
Layoffs are the only way companies can get rid of shitty employees, especially those of protected classes. This is why it's an important part of the process. Remember, the American Dream is to make enough money to be able to afford ignoring the impacts of Civil Rights.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Rustled
Reactions: 1 users

Palum

what Suineg set it to
25,605
38,759
The bottom 10% of general officer workers are never doing 10% of the total work. They're doing like 2-5% tops.

Remember how pareto rules work.

Yea but I don't want to fucking go across town to the UPS store when I have wall to wall meetings.
 

Gravel

Mr. Poopybutthole
38,345
124,177
The bottom 10% of general officer workers are never doing 10% of the total work. They're doing like 2-5% tops.

Remember how pareto rules work.
What a weird comment when the Pareto Principle is 80/20. But okay.
 
  • 1Truth!
  • 1Double Worf
Reactions: 1 users

Haus

<Silver Donator>
12,430
48,368
The bottom 10% of general officer workers are never doing 10% of the total work. They're doing like 2-5% tops.

Remember how pareto rules work.
The accepted ratios I see just about across the board are that the top 20% of your workforce gets around 80% of the actual work done. Managers who don't study history see this and think "Great, we just lay off the bottom 20% and it's a minimal impact". But they don't follow the history enough to know that when you do that then the whole thing still ends up rebalancing, so the top 20% (now fewer) still do 80%, but that overall number is now lower.. And the added stress on those top 20% make them start leaving.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 users

Haus

<Silver Donator>
12,430
48,368
Secret Project: Replace TomServo
Secret Project : DISplace TomServo, but to avoid a rush for the doors bribe him with a guaranteed exit package to sign an NDA promising not to tell all the people we're laying off before him that it's coming...
 
  • 1Tendies
Reactions: 1 user

Big Phoenix

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Gold Donor>
45,870
96,581
It also leads to overworking your best employees who have to then cover all the work of everyone you let go. Even if they were only doing 10% of the work, that's 10% that now falls on the rest.
Not just that but firing so many people has to have serious consequences down the line. How does Intel or Dell fire 10k+ people and not have projects or productively massively impacted?
 

Furry

BROWN NOW
<Gold Donor>
20,758
26,634
The bottom 10% of general officer workers are never doing 10% of the total work. They're doing like 2-5% tops.

Remember how pareto rules work.
I consider myself a bottom 10% worker and I’m definitely doing sub 0.1% of the work. I regularly sleep and game on the clock while completing ignoring things I’m supposed to do.
 
  • 1Moron
Reactions: 1 user

TomServo

<Bronze Donator>
6,721
9,178
I consider myself a bottom 10% worker and I’m definitely doing sub 0.1% of the work. I regularly sleep and game on the clock while completing ignoring things I’m supposed to do.
Your a fed. Duh
 
  • 2Worf
Reactions: 1 users

Tmac

Adventurer
<Gold Donor>
9,842
16,737
I consider myself a bottom 10% worker and I’m definitely doing sub 0.1% of the work. I regularly sleep and game on the clock while completing ignoring things I’m supposed to do.

Despicable.
 
  • 1Truth!
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 users