#forcedranking

All it takes is everyone or the majority saying they will not be participating in it anymore and there is nothing they can do. They can't NSI everyone! Spread the word and make them stop!

I got a partially meets for the first time in my career based on very shaky reasons that didn’t reflect my work or feedback. Anyone else in my boat? I’m assuming this just makes me first in line for RIFs, but is it an automatic de*th sentence? If my part of the business isn’t hit will I be let go anyway? Obvs no one is psychic, just wondering about lived experience.

Each cycle has a target percentage that must land in MLRP (NI + NSI). That percentage isn’t identical across all organizations, but the weighted average across the whole function has to match whatever HR planned for that year. Is it possible for some teams in some orgs to have zero NI or NSI in a cycle?

Well, it finally happened. Got called into a “quick sync” with my manager Monday morning. HR was already in the room, which tells you everything. They slid the PIP paperwork across the table, and before I could even read the “performance expectations” section, they informed me that because this was my second PIP in a five-year window, company policy allowed them to skip the improvement period entirely. Effective immediately. I was walked back to my desk by security to grab my jacket and my kid’s drawing off the monitor. Badge deactivated before I hit the parking garage. Eleven years, and I was out of the building in under 40 minutes. Some context for anyone who hasn’t been through the Exxon performance machine: the forced ranking system means somebody is always in the bottom bucket. Doesn’t matter how the team performs. My first PIP in 2022 came after a reorg where my entire project got shelved so nothing to show for the year because there was nothing left to show. I survived it, “closed it out successfully,” and naively thought that was behind me.

Many large companies still use some version of forced ranking, stack ranking, or quota-based performance management where a certain percentage of employees end up in the bottom bucket regardless of overall team performance.

Supporters say it drives accountability and prevents complacency.

Critics argue it creates:

• Internal competition instead of collaboration
• Risk aversion and politics
• Managers spending time managing rankings instead of developing people
• Employees focusing on visibility rather than impact
• Anxiety that reduces long-term engagement

If an organization is profitable, meeting business objectives, and retaining strong talent, what would actually convince leadership to eliminate forced ranking and PIPs as a routine management tool?

Would it take:

• Better performance metrics?
• Evidence of lower turnover?
• A major labor shortage?
• Executive leadership that came up through different systems?
• Or is forced ranking simply too useful for managing headcount and compensation budgets?

For those who have worked at companies that abandoned stack ranking, what replaced it and did it work better?

Interested in hearing experiences from both managers and individual contributors.

As we go into the annual review process, HR is always quick to point out that the employee evaluations have no direct correlation to the amount that an employee might get as a "merit" increase. I have two issues with this:

1. When increases come around every year, the vast majority of employees get a "merit" increases in the 1-3% range. This is essentially a cost of living adjustment. In fact that amount is usually less than inflation, so most of us are getting paid less every year (relatively speaking).

2. If an employee is rated as "developing" they are ineligible for a "merit" increase. Managers are pressured to identify approx. 5-10% of their team who fall into the "developing" category. These employees don't even get a cost of living adjustment, which is, for all intents and purposes, a pay cut because of forced ranking of team members.

HR points out to managers that its ok to label someone as "developing" if they've been in the role for <1 year, so a lot of managers put their newer employees in that category. But based on your hire date, that might mean you may go 18+ months before getting any sort of cost of living adjustment. For managers without any new team members (which are most of them after all the WFRs), they can find themselves stuck tagging a few people who may get a rating they don't deserve and its corresponding pay-cut because of the stack ranking.

Because this has been brought up, HR says they're evaluating the policy on "developing" employees not being eligible for increases, but that opens a can of worms if they do.

More and more, it feels like yet another underhanded way of getting people to quit so the company can continue to fly under any government regulations for lay-offs that exceed a certain threshold number of affected workers. In this case, the idea is that you get lower performing people to leave, however, I'd argue that in some teams, there simply aren't people who are truly "developing" and thus get pushed out because of this manipulative process.

I sincerely hope that this is still just a holdover from the previous regime's culture that will be corrected by the new executive leadership team, but I'm not holding my breath.

For those of you in IT&V who have been ranked and yanked, what was your experience? Any signs ahead of time? Particular day of the week?

FA managers got the email this morning - start FY26 Performance Evaluations as part of the alignment effort. Manager ratings to be review by leadership. Not stated, but expect a “rack and stack” of employees to be part of the process. Evaluations to be completed by June 26. Is this preparation for the next round of layoffs?

Just curious if EM executives set the same PIP targets for people that get paid full salaries vs people that get paid 1/10 salaries.
It seems the bar is set much lower for the 1/10 salary group. The person in America making corrections to BTC work products seems to get a lower ranking and more likely PIP’d than the engineers that made the potentially catastrophic errors in BTC.

Clearly the next step will be to either:

1. Lengthen the time window (e.g. 2nd NSI during career = automatic separation)
2. Change to mandatory separation in first NSI

Some assessment groups have different distributions to allow more people to be ranked high or low. Seems fishy.

Public employee discussions on forums like this reveal several recurring concerns that individuals cite when pursuing wrongful‑termination claims or requesting class‑action investigation into workforce‑management practices at BNY. While these accounts represent employee perspectives rather than verified legal findings, the themes appear consistently across posts.

1. Abrupt and Unexplained Performance Rating Declines
Employees report sudden drops in performance evaluations despite prior positive reviews or long‑term satisfactory performance. Many allege that these changes lacked documentation, coaching, or clear justification, leading them to believe the ratings were adjusted to support predetermined termination decisions.

2. Use of Forced‑Ranking or Stack‑Ranking Systems
Some individuals claim that ranking methodologies required a fixed percentage of employees to be categorized as low performers, regardless of actual contribution. They argue that this system created artificial grounds for termination and disproportionately affected certain groups.

3. Pressure to Resign in Lieu of Formal Layoffs
Multiple accounts describe employees being encouraged to resign voluntarily rather than being formally laid off. Posters assert that this practice was used to avoid severance obligations or to reduce the appearance of workforce reductions.

4. Inconsistent or Withheld Severance Packages
Employees report discrepancies in severance eligibility, including reductions, denials, or last‑minute changes. These inconsistencies are cited as contributing factors in claims of unfair or unequal treatment.

5. Replacement of U.S. Roles With Lower‑Cost Offshore Positions
Some individuals allege that their roles were eliminated and subsequently transitioned to offshore teams. They argue that these decisions may reflect discriminatory or retaliatory motives, forming part of the basis for legal complaints.

6. Retaliation Following Protected Activity or Internal Complaints
A number of posters claim they were terminated shortly after raising workplace concerns, questioning new policies, or reporting issues to management. These accounts assert that the timing suggests retaliatory intent.

7. Patterns Suggesting Systemic Workforce Practices
Because many employees describe similar experiences, some argue that the issues may reflect broader organizational patterns rather than isolated incidents. This perceived consistency is a primary driver behind calls for class‑action investigation.

Some info for new employees: knowledgeable others’ feedback (KOF) does not always reflect true performance. You can have great KOFs but poor ranking outcome and vise versa, depending on internal dynamics.

• When a manager pressures you to list specific individuals for KOF—especially those unlikely to provide supportive or accurate feedback—it can predetermine the outcome and increase the risk of being rated NI/NSI.
• In contrast, some employees may be allowed to list observers they barely worked with, and if the manager approves those names, fake great feedback.
• If someone claims to have mentored or supported you but does not list that you in their own KOF selections, it is often a sign that their feedback may not be protective or aligned with your interests.
• Managers can access offline or informal feedback channels, and when they insist on certain KOF names, it may indicate they are steering the process toward a specific outcome.

So here it is the Enron model for managing headcount - forced ranking with 12 different goals, most out of your control. BOTTOMLINE, just another way to reduce 10% each year. Interested what comments are:

I wont say much apart from this one thing “do you not know mike that your mc’s force people down to needs improvement when they really are not bad performers”

Because of my rating I am feeling sui-idal. My manager even said that they were forced to and that nothing is wrong. So Mike do you not know that this messes with peoples lives. Do you not fu--ing know.

In high-trust societies, people assume good intent. Information flows freely. Collaboration feels natural. In low-trust systems, the opposite happens: people protect themselves first. Energy shifts from building to guarding.

Consider modern Russia. Decades of opacity and centralized control have cultivated widespread skepticism toward institutions. Citizens often rely on private networks rather than public systems. Information is filtered. Incentives are distorted. When trust erodes, talent adapts by becoming cautious, political, and self-protective.

Our corporate environment shows similar warning signs. Competitive ranking systems pit colleagues against each other. Information becomes currency. Feedback is filtered for safety rather than truth. Instead of asking, “How do we win together?” people ask, “How do I avoid losing?” Innovation slows because risk feels dangerous. Collaboration weakens because vulnerability feels unsafe.

Over time, this trajectory leads to silos, quiet disengagement, and eventually mediocrity. High performers optimize for optics. Emerging leaders learn to manage perception instead of outcomes. Trust, once depleted, is expensive to rebuild.

If we continue reinforcing internal competition over shared success, we shouldn’t be surprised when initiative declines and politics rise (and one may say that we are already there). But the reverse is also true: when trust increases, performance compounds.

The future of our company will not be determined by strategy alone, but by whether we choose fear-based competition or trust-based collaboration. We sit in a moment when the system to identify future Management is hindering the ability to run the organization. Perhaps its time to not burden the majority of the organization with PDS classifications and let them operate with a stable performance reward system. No system is great but we sit in a time of history where a credible change is necessary.

White Cap HR is rolling out a forced‑ranking system.

Leaders are being told they can only give out a fixed number of ratings — one “Meets,” and one “Needs Improvement” — even when all employees actually meet expectations. In this example the leader has two employees.

The problem? Raises and bonuses are tied directly to these ratings. That means someone is being forced into a lower rating (and lower pay) purely to satisfy HR’s quota, not because of performance.

Forced distribution isn’t automatically illegal for private companies, but it becomes a legal risk fast when:

• Ratings don’t reflect actual performance
• Pay is manipulated through artificial quotas
• Certain groups are disproportionately pushed into “Needs Improvement”
• Managers are pressured to create negative documentation

This is exactly the kind of system that has triggered discrimination and wrongful‑termination lawsuits at other companies.

If this is really the new direction, employees should document everything — because HR is creating a paper trail that doesn’t match reality.

Used to be great place to work...could get away with so much skiving. Then if they wanted rid of you would bench you followed by Payoff...or just a payoff.

But there's another way to get you to go....give you lower performance rating than deserve. And they'll get away with it under new framework. Appeal? ...sure but not to an independent panel, to the same people who give you your score. Great system.

Spoke to my manager today and he told me 40% of people were given lower score than should have had simply for reason 'we want to reduce headcount'.

Things are broken, time to think about Plan B

BNY MANAGERS / EMPLOYEES COMMENTING ABOUT FORCED PERFORMANCE RANKINGS, ALTERED REVIEWS, & FAKE RATINGS/REVIEWS

Here is a link that can be shared to:
Lawyers
Government agencies
Politicians
Media
Social Media

In addition to sending this link to anyone if you choose to do this, you can copy the below onto an Excel file to send that also. Then go to each cell that has the link to create the hyperlink. Now it is much easier to go through each of the 64 links below by using the Excel file and just clicking on the hyperlink instead of having to copy and paste each link 64 times.

End of year review

10/18/2024 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1v3USrXS

Forced Rankings

10/30/2024 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1vfzdq2Q

Bank of New York Mellon Layoffs 2025

11/3/2024 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1vjnRp5X

Severance. READ

11/22/2024 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kanvn6nh

Layoff month?

12/4/2024 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1vO1iWQh

Huge layoffs 2025

12/9/2024 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1vTPI3uc

Layoffs

12/10/2024 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1vUclZML

Evaluations are ridiculous

12/13/2024 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1vXOz4Cf

"… delayed year end reviews"

12/20/2024 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1w4acO3Y

Unethical conduct needs to be exposed

3/6/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jnq61rxs

6/4/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jwysz9hk

BNY’S negative impact on Mental Heath

6/8/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jx8e560b

25% not meeting expectations by year end?

6/10/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jxdztagf

Mid-Year

6/12/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jxkfd2vw

What are the rankings for?

6/16/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jxxnrc83

Forget about ratings and evaluations

6/18/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jy2bmmeg

6/24/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jygkgb3m

6/29/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jyyhdrt8

Addressing Age Bias

6/30/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jz0k2f5y

Does anybody still dare to disagree with anything in meetings anymore?

7/2/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jz685hcd

What are your options if you have been put on a PIP plan

7/7/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jzkdxpkn

Percentage to be ranked underperforming?

7/9/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jzrxwmj4

BNY PTSD

7/10/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jzth57na

Laying off in New York office?

7/17/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k0b93rem

Are we still pretending RTO was ever about productivity?

7/20/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k0m7mrrb

BNY Executive Strategy

7/23/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k0w0v3m1

Unfair rating

7/26/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k14pynw5

Battle Royale enviroment

8/10/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k29b61hr

PIPs, rankings, evaluations - they're all just cover for cuts

8/10/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k2b2xzs4

RTO 4 days sept

8/19/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k31tyhgq

Question regarding severance

8/25/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k3gk2wwg

8/25/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k3hx4sj2

25% Below

8/26/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k3jcj2n2

This place is toxic

9/3/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k47t0dan

BAH employee descrimination

9/23/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k5vyfa6f

No severence for you!

9/29/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k6bfsb60

High severance employees targeted

9/30/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k6d8ga4y

HR involvement in PIP

10/7/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k70mfaga

25% of bad ratings

10/15/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k7m85xy8

Year end in October?

10/17/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k7rjbb40

10/17/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k7sbwrmj

Forced ranking and state unemployment

10/18/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k7vmtecy

Will I be in the 25%?

10/18/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k7x2wrh3

I'm so tired of outsourcing

10/19/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k7yc7yy2

Morale's about to tank

10/24/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k8c8yrqy

December round finalized?

10/24/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k8b8gmps

Forced ratings

10/25/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k8e2kcpa

How is Collateral Management

10/29/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k8sgq033

Got out of jail card

11/6/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k9cqbgdr

Some Expectations Rating

11/25/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kayjyfk5

No forced ratings per HR

12/3/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kbjgv9en

Review this coming week

12/6/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kbv0hjhd

How can this happen?

12/7/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kbwpa5w2

To people worried about their reviews

12/7/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kbxp0grw

Let go this week

12/12/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kc9ytkz9

Reviews

12/16/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kcn1edkt

Bogus Performance Reviews

12/17/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kcq1468q

Merry Christmas

12/18/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kcrwen6j

Let Go 1 Week Before Christmas

12/18/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kcrydr7x

Bank of New York Mellon Layoffs 2026

12/20/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kcx3gtdq

Did anyone receive a bs rating and actually fight it

12/27/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kdgeyxj3

PIP In Disguise as Layoff

12/30/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kds9r52t

I doubt there'll be many more layoffs

12/31/2025 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kdt7kszv

Mandatory 10 percent PIP

1/14/2026 https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kez989mz

sounding like new system going to be used sc--w people over

Like the song by Calvin Harris ft. Ne-Yo - "Let's Go"

Please see these 4 posts and quotes from other threads.

From the Washington Post (April 2, 2023): “Feel free to spill the beans, ex-employees. Your former boss can’t stop you.”
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kgea4gzm

From the NLRB (Feb 21, 23): "Board Rules that Employers May Not Offer Severance Agreements Requiring Employees to Broadly Waive Labor Law Rights
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kgeacnt5

From the NLRB about "Concerted Activity"
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kgeakdsm

From the NLRB about "Social media"
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kgeb10b8

Quotes:

March 6, 2025
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jnq61rxs
"Unethical conduct needs to be exposed
BNY is force ranking long tenured employees with PM or BE and depriving them from the Severance, it so disgraceful towards people who have given so much to the company none of the past reviews matter. We should report this in social media if we do in number that will speak for itself…. When we don’t have NDA what are we loosing?"

June 9, 2025
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jwysz9hk
"time for managers to take a stand. Bullsh-t that good employees now being called underperformers to not pay severance. UNETECHAL.

COMPANY NEEDS TO PAY OR GET CALLED OUT"

June 11, 2025
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jwysz9hk
"Until we band together as a large group nothing is going to change. And I don't see enough people with a backbone willing to to this. Too many sheeple afraid of losing their jobs. Well most of us are probably going to lose them anyway so might as well fight for it instead of lay down."

June 27, 205
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jygkgb3m
"We need to get together and start a forum to keep in step with their plan of “reduce staff with minimal expense” (don’t pay severance)
Power in numbers .
Could someone set it up ?Or should I ? Is there interest???"

September 3, 2025
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k47t0dan
"This place is toxic

They’re trying to break us so we leave and they dont have to pay severance. We have all experienced it or witnessed the behaviors. , U.S staff treated like 2nd class citizens, wrongful terminations, intentional forced ratings etc. The list goes on and on. Its not going to stop until we all come together and try to do something. We need to report them to your states EEOC . Get An investigation going."

September 25, 2025
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k60fr4h8
"Contact your local senate office for the district you live in. Bring as much light to this as you can because if he has his way all americans will be out of a job soon. All he cares about is India and now Manchester his homeland."

October 17, 2025
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1k7rjbb40
"mgmt does push back and literally gets told its not optional by upper mgmt. if lower level dont make changes which we havent, upper does it regardless. Everyone needs to report the company or it wont stop. We all have local leaders and each state has EEOC plus put it on record with ethics. Mgmt knows there are forced rankings can testify too the bullsh-t as well. Stay silent this sh-t continues while we get let go and india makes out taking our jobs"

December 4, 2025
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kbjgv9en
"We need to band together as mgrs on this sh-t. Screenshot any emails or teams messages that show these are forced as proof"

December 6, 2025
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kbk9pt5n
"absolutely and every single person here should contact the media to raise enough eyebrows about the topic. They have an email for topic suggestions
cwc-news@interactive.wsj.com. Make sure the subject mentions BNY financial institutions firing US employees and falsifying performance ratings to help do so. We have to get media attention"

December 17, 2025
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1kcq1468q
"You can turn it in to your states EEOC. As a mgr i can 💯 confirm they forced ratings and changed them after we entered them to hit their reduction %. People have challenged this and the attempt to not give severance and noted on this site they have won. Others noted journalists or lawyers looking into this and wanting details. Check out the “fight them” post"

Hey XOM people. We’ll be adopting your forced ranking system this year, PIPs for 0.7s etc. So many rumors here and nothing from management when we ask so I thought I’d go to the source. Is the distribution by team regardless of size or does the distribution go up to a GM or VP level? We have PIPs already but they’re used for disciplinary purposes. I’ve only met one person on a PIP. They were let go but it was pretty egregious. Now we’re going to use them as an “improvement tool” or something.

15 percent of high performers across all band levels are be rated as low performers to reduce bonus pay outs. This is the next move on attrition. Next steps may be pips and subsequent layoffs. You would think a company as large as IBM would be able to handle this differently. Hopefully people who know they are high performers that get a low performance review know this has nothing to do with them and everything to do with the dysfunctional management team at IBM.

I have it on good authority that those with the new forced lowest ranking will be fired at the end of the year.

The genius move, is that this isn’t considered a layoff. So no severance is needed.

May the odds be ever in your favor

My manager told me directly today that the entire company is forcing managers to give employees low ratings.
Time to leave, guys. They’re trying to get rid of everyone in the U.S. Leave this sh*thole, and for anyone considering coming here—please don’t.

...but they sc--wed up!! They laid me off on 9/30. Not too bright...now they'll have to mark down one of their buddies due to the "curve" ranking. LOLOLOLOL! Oh the irony.....

• band 4+ individual contributors: add a personalized leadership goal aligned to at least one leadership competency (great, we have to provide leadership without the pay or title)

• starting with the 2026 year-end review, all employees will receive a 4-point performance rating, building on the band 6+ approach used in 2025 (no way could this be used as a "rank and yank" method to target workers for termination)

Great things ahead for those not lucky enough to get the VRP!

“Pay will be tied more closely to differentiated performance…”

Once again, raising the bar to heights they themselves did not have to achieve.

So are we now incentivized to hope our colleagues can’t perform or sc--w up? With a forced rank rating system, that’s what will happen. Not ‘one team’ anymore

Supervisors in CTC have been told that under no account should they ever give 2x EE. If they want to they need approval from JK

How's that for motivation?

Since when does ‘meets expectations’ require significant achievement? To me this sounds like giving management the green card to start PIP-ing those still left. Anyone on the bottom 10% of who is left after 40% have been cut. Anyone with a real performance issue would not have survived all the recent mass layoffs.

Once there was a bank that made record profits because their employees worked to lift the asset cap. Then one day Scrooge decided force rank employees so at least one from each team got cut no matter how good they were. That year the families that lost jobs had a miserable Christmas and worried about affording their mortgages and healthcare. Some families couldn’t let their kid go back to college in January because they lost their job. Then one day the ghost of Christmas future paid a visit to the leaders in charge and….(continue the story below)

Any leaders who can confirm a rumor? I heard that there is a requirement that at a certain level (team, department, or other) where a % of associates must be given a 1 rating. No other info and hoping it’s just a rumor. Looking for someone with more info.

There is a new top down order for the VP level stack ranking to be done by end of JAN and the bottom 20% to be part of the upcoming AWS layoff in FEB.

Layoffs with two NS and some forced rankings of one NS in our department VAS. Anyone else’s departments affected?

Go to your directory find your SD go to each AD that reports to them copy them all onto a spreadsheet including the managers since their on the chopping block too. Riff at least 20% from that list after rack and stack everyone if you fall into the bottom 20% then you know the answer.

I did that last Friday and I'm good too go for now.

My 20% was about 16 people across 5-6 managers

Do with that what you will

Overheard in the hallway that managers are being forced to rank their teams across all the ratings, even the lower ratings.

Has anyone heard this ??

Its an open secret now that there is a quota for performance ratings this year, similar to last. no 5s are allowed at all and there is a minimum number of 2s per team that must be allocated or senior leadership will draw names from a hat.

My question - Do any people leaders know if offshore team member's 2s count towards this quota? Our team is 18 offshore and 4 onshore. Would we be forced to lose another onshore person?

We used to have 9 onshore team members before this madness. any more onshore layoffs would mean we are on call and doing releases at night once every 3 weeks, which is insane. :( All the offshore folks are also at a university student level skill-wise, despite senior level titles, so they dont help with anything.

Can’t say all of Optum Tech, just my area. I have about 20 people under me and I gave out two 5’s, six 4’s, the rest were 3’s.
I was informed this morning I am “allotted” zero 5’s, one 4, and I need to give out at least three 2’s.
Upper management is really pushing for the 2’s to the sent their way by end of week.
Last year 3’s and lower got NO raise and bonus was about half of the allotted amount.
Read into it what you will.