How true is this?
Yes it’s true
It’s a good thing.
Under performing and politically disposable people 😁
Yea, it’s true. Bottom 6%
How do they staff new positions? Or do they just not care? I was listening to a recruiter complain that there’s too many open roles they can’t fill but it seems to me they don’t want to.
Not strictly that number, but fb manages people out pretty fast and the lowest "career level" (e5) that you can cruise on forever is higher than what many achieve and they find themselves pushed out
They don't exactly fire underperformers. Take Amazon got example. Everything there is highly political. If you kiss enough ass and can slither your way around the orgs, you'll never have to worry about being fired, secret Dev listed or PIPed. You can be shittier than the shittiest and the better person will be let go because your the skips buddy or the manager's cohort. I've already watched this happen multiple times. The best part is when this is actually proven and shown to the ones above the duo that are pulling it off, they figure out a way to make the person disappear for a bit and then they suddenly pop up in another org. I'm not gonna lie, it stings when you see this happen on your team and you loose a valuable contributer and get your work load doubled again so the duo can continue to move each other up.the ranks.
Facebook has an up or out policy, there is a hard rule for lower levels and a soft rule at higher levels. At lower levels there's a defined timeline. At higher levels there's no timeline but your manager needs to assess whether you are growing. Amazon has a quota, but it's lower than 10%. In practice it works a little like the Facebook system because discussion often focuses on people who are stuck in level too long, but we don't need to wait for that if an issue is identified earlier and I'm sure Facebook doesn't always wait either.
At higher levels you really can stay there without getting promoted. There is no up or out policy at these levels (even a soft one), BUT the bar is quite high there as is and you're not given the chance to slow down and underperform your level for a year without getting pushed out. And true - fb doesnt wait, but that's relevant when you're not meeting the expectations for the current level and because of being unable to grow to the next level.
Facebook? Just simple: no free lunch. I don't know why letting underperforming persons go is considered bad. I really hate companies with a bunch of coasters. My previous company did.
Agreed. It's a good thing. I wish Microsoft would clean itself better. It's one of the reasons pay is bad.
Y'all really think Amazon fires 60,000 people a year? Rofl
10% is the number who go into formal development plans but half of them improve their performance and return to good standing, while half quit or get fired. So it's five percent but that includes people smart enough to find a new job before they get axed so actual firing probably only 2% or less.
Ok...so you think Amazon really fires 15 to 30k!?
Software Engineering Career
Yesterday
353
[New-grad, Remote] Where should I move?
Tech Industry
Yesterday
1843
Absurdities of the Bay Area 😒
India
Yesterday
717
Any Indians Think Kashmir Should be Independent?
India
5h
1859
Why is it so G*damn difficult to move money out of India
India
Yesterday
1154
What do vegetarian Indians eat for protein?
Very true?