11–20 of 144 posts
Any Google venture that they want to sell as a setvice is very likely not going to be taken up with much enthusiasm in the market because of this. I’d not be blaming employees for this!
It’s incredibly shitty to telegraph to other employers that all the people you’re about to layoff are damaged goods. Completely unnecessary.
With the exception of companies going under or closing divisions or departments what kind of companies shave off “high performers”? Sure some high performers could erroneously slip trough but the intent is predominantly to lay off poor performers (sometimes high earners or older employees, but not usually)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With the exception of companies going under or closing divisions or departments what kind of companies shave off “high performers”? Sure some high performers could erroneously slip trough but the intent is predominantly to lay off poor performers (sometimes high earners or older employees, but not usually)
It's pretty normal to close entire teams or departments. That includes high performers.
It’s incredibly shitty to telegraph to other employers that all the people you’re about to layoff are damaged goods. Completely unnecessary.
With the exception of companies going under or closing divisions or departments what kind of companies shave off “high performers”? Sure some high performers could erroneously slip trough but the intent is predominantly to lay off poor performers (sometimes high earners or older employees, but not usually)
In horizontal layoffs, usually a lot of talented people and even turn-key teams are available on the market.
Sometimes companies try to turn horizontal layoffs vertical by offering internal mobility for high performers from the cut teams, but sometimes they don’t.
Publicly stating that layoffs are purely vertical is very bad for the employees who are laid off as they no longer re-apply with the “benefit of doubt” that they may have been caught as collateral damage in horizontal layoffs.
Quoted post unavailable.
It’s incredibly shitty to telegraph to other employers that all the people you’re about to layoff are damaged goods. Completely unnecessary.
With the exception of companies going under or closing divisions or departments what kind of companies shave off “high performers”? Sure some high performers could erroneously slip trough but the intent is predominantly to lay off poor performers (sometimes high earners or older employees, but not usually)
You can have plenty of people who are very good at a skill you either don’t need or have an oversupply of bus numbers on. At least a third of the people in any group you shut down completely are going to have been good people. More than half if the problem was in management (which is usually is).
You’re dunking on these people and telling the rest of the universe not to hire them. But we already knew Google was shitty so this isn’t exactly news.
The founders are done with each other and long gone. It's just a financial entity maximizing profit. It's amazing to watch the full circle of Google's brilliant birth to slow plateau.
It’s incredibly shitty to telegraph to other employers that all the people you’re about to layoff are damaged goods. Completely unnecessary.