Just saw a guy post on LinkedIn: - 14 years at Google. Senior Manager in marketing technology and engineering - Computer engineering degree -MBA from NYU Got laid off. What is selection criteria for laying a guy like this off? I assumed a guy like this would be valuable to the business as he appeared to work in a more technical org. Who decides he goes, and why might they select somone like him? TC: 220k #google #layoffs #layoff
I think the question is what is the criteria for that metric?
Memegen score
Yeah exactly. What would go into that metric? Salary. Tenure...etc
This person could have had a disagreement with someone more powerful than them and rubbed them the wrong way. The decision maker doesn't think this person is doing a very good job. The higher ups haven't been impressed with how this person runs their team. This person doesn't have much impact on the top or bottom line. This person makes too much for what they deliver. They are a jerk and this is an opportunity to get them out. There is someone running a campaign to discredit this person and are positioning themselves to take their job. Management is sort of like a game of thrones...
Totally agreed with the game of thrones reference have seen in in couple of companies. Just adding here if the leadership at higher level are filled with bunch of golf players who have it is what it is mindset and if their reports try to change things then that can also be part of the metric!
Very few people at Google know, and they aināt talking
They can talk here on Blind.
I think they are saving it for their YouTube channel
If he was working at google for 14 years without much advancement in the last few years, you could arguably fire him and get someone more junior with lower overhead to dl the same job. Upward mobility is tough in google because of ācoastersā who ārest and vestā
There cannot be 165,000 CEOs or VPs or Directors. How do you propose an employee keep moving up?
Nor can there be 165000 L3 SWEs.
The only way you donāt get laid off for sure is if youāre shielded by an influential executive. Everyone else is assumed to be disposable. Your mistake is thinking itās a process based on merit.
So what is it based on?
Itās based on cutting enough jobs in each business unit to meet the spend reduction quotas set forward for them by the ELT while having the total cohort of people not cross any redlines with regards to bias against any one protected group. Unless you are a company wide rockstar you arenāt going to be exempted. They can and will easily backfill any needed talent and will be able to do so more efficiently after the layoffs. Seriously the more prestigious the place the more easy it is to be let go because thereās always a line of people dying to get in.
Nobody knows
Dude, after 14 years in industry your shoe size is more relevant than whatever degree from whatever college. Guys been at G for 14 years, that's enough time for his brain to stop giving any original ideas that would work.
> Marketing Thatās why
Layoffs are just a number game. More you earn more chances you are on that list. Easier to layoff 1 person with 500k base as compare to 5 ppl with 100k
They created a spreadsheet, sorted employees by a certain metric and laid off everyone chosen by that metric.
ORDER BY salary DESC, impact ASC LIMIT 12000
More like: RAND(employeeID) WHERE salary > 200000