10 ms·
I’ve seen this at a Fortune-50 company, on their own website! Project managers got requisitions from HR and so they posted a job opening. (So far so good) How
by BobbyTables2 3y ago
I’ve seen this at a Fortune-50 company, on their own website!
Project managers got requisitions from HR and so they posted a job opening. (So far so good)
However, the company instituted hiring freezes for 2-3 quarters of each year. No hiring, even for the open positions…
Later, there would be layoffs, so PMs would trade unfilled requisitions with HR instead of firing existing people.
It mattered little in the end because they axed the entire department (up to the director) and rebuilt it overseas.
None of this was ever visible publicly.
- dan-robertson 3y agoI guess at least this is better than hanging on to people you don’t want in a team so they can be laid off when the demand comes in to avoid being forced to give up the people you do want.
- datavirtue 3y agoSounds like a dystopian shit hole.
- black_13 3y ago[dead]
- jimbob45 3y agoWhy not just fire them? Severance isn’t guaranteed yet in the US and just cause isn’t that hard to document (I’m genuinely asking - HR fascinates me).
- ghaff 3y agoHe's saying that whether or not they fire this person the day may come when they have to get rid of someone. More broadly, managers like to hold onto headcount if they can unless someone is a real problem for their team. If they're just someone who isn't an ideal fit any longer they'll probably hold onto them.
- bombcar 3y agoExactly. They’re cards in a game that may require you to discard suddenly - you don’t want to discard early.
- al_borland 3y agoAs someone who has worked in an environment like this for a long time, those people still exist. Everyone on the team generally knows who’s at the bottom and would get let go. Ideally there are enough open positions to cover the layoffs, but that’s not always the case.
- tracker1 3y agoI have a friend who works for a major aircraft mfg (that may have suicided a whistleblower) who's seen this kind of activity for the better part of a decade over and over. Currently going through a relatively credit migrate everything to the cloud effort.
- stavros 3y agoThis is odd, because, if anything, the Boeing 737 Max has been migrating off the cloud.
- jongjong 3y agoThey already finished the migration... Fastest cloud to bare metal migration in history. I also hear they have a unique, high-impact approach to blackbox testing.
- awesomeMilou 3y agoMove fast, break things!
- monksy 3y agoyou son of a ...
- Freedom2 3y agoI don't quite understand this - is the plane moving to on premise? What features of the cloud does it use regularly?
- al_borland 3y agoIt was a joke, the constant parts falling from them… falling from the clouds. Literal clouds, not datacenter clouds.
- jongjong 3y agoThey're going on-premise all right! Straight back to the hangar... Then off to the scrap heap. That's certainly one way to go bare metal. In terms of cloud features they used; the one where it breaks up mid air and rains down to earth...
- al_borland 3y agoThis has been standard practice where I’m at for at least a decade. I don’t know if the jobs were even posted, but we always felt short staffed. It turned out the Sr Dir would always hold back at least 3 position and leave them unfilled, so when layoffs came (which happens at least twice a year), he could simply give up those reqs and it would appear to the team that we were unaffected and operations could keep running as normal. It wasn’t until I made it into the VPs inner circle that I found out how the game was played.
- avidiax 3y agoI have also heard that managers like to keep job postings for every role up if employment conditions create a flight risk. If someone gives their 2 weeks notice, there is a nice long pipeline of would-have-been ghost candidates for their role, which speeds up recruiting the replacement by a month at least.
- johnnyanmac 3y agoThis seems really stupid if I'm understanding correctly. So layoffs come as a way to reduce costs, and instead you can give up an empty seat that probably at best had a few thousand dollars of labor trying (not) to hire for? This sounds like a hiring freeze with extra steps instead of a layoff. And ofc the concept of skilled labor needed year round needing to layoff people twice a year is a failure in and of itself. Why not just contract the job at that point? government nitty griity details, I'm guessing?
- red-iron-pine 3y ago> It mattered little in the end because they axed the entire department (up to the director) and rebuilt it overseas. burying the lede it's a shell game / chaos situation while they ultimately implement cost cutting.