I heard a rumor in November that management had no decision in the personnel that were fired and that it was all determined by AI. Can anyone with HR intel verify if that is true and how are layoffs being determined for the next round?
21 replies (most recent on top)
@b8 you described my experience on a similar type of team (and your former dept head has a bad rep everywhere in Verizon). Leaders who are AFRAID to talk to anyone who’s not a direct report. and their direct reports scared to talk more than one level down. leaders openly and publicly encouraging people not to do work at all on company time. leaders routinely behaving improperly and unprofessionally. leaders blocking project timelines. leaders who think they are holier than anyone on earth, but really they are sc-m. say anything- and you’re public enemy no. 1.
the difference is I’m not scared of anything. they are. they are scared every second of every day. karma is a biotch. clean house with all Director levels and VP levels.
I know for a fact my notification was personal, the Senior Director I worked if one disagreed with his decisions which over 90% were incorrect, you were targeted. Once I was notified, I was gum that was scraped off their shoe. How much work was done since none. the CISO never communicated past her disciples. all of them lied on how each org under was operating at. Metrics were made up, progress on work was made up. Security initiative dates were made up, All
hands calls the content sometimes was someone dancing around on the video, while others calculated how much an all hands call cost the company. PCI run by people who to this day keep track of stuff via a spreadsheet. not one shred of documentation that is auditable by a 3rd party.
So here’s the truth, the Sr. Directors think they are mightier than everyone and they do the least amount of work. Time to clean house is Sr. Directors and let the VPs and AVPs do their job.
My Sr. Director is and always has been useless she makes decisions that impact people thinking she’s untouchable time for her to go. Plus if the Sr. Directors go look at the amazing cost savings and look at all the amazing frontline workers who get to do their jobs. Bring back the high morale and do the right thing, fire the right people for once.
@aj Call the Employee Assistance Program and ask for mental health counselor. Explain that you are under extreme stress / anxiety and need some time off to get your head straight.
Managers last time had a quota and picked who to chop.
@ad how does that work? What does doctor submit
AI can make whatever recommendations it wants, it's still up the leadership on what to do with the information.
@ab Take 3-6 months of stress leave . Paid - relaxing .
@a7 Stack ranks are highly subjective but they give a thin veneer of objectivity.
@aa oh one more thing to add. ANOTHER thing I found out is that when you are under investigation and your direct manager calls you once a week to “update” you and tell you “it’s looking like term, they are pushing for termination” and the investigation drags out for MONTHS. Literally 2-3 months while they leave you hanging on suspense and keep calling to say “it’s not looking good. It most likely will be termination” that is ALSO a disgusting scare tactic. It’s a common tactic to coerce employees they dont want working there to quit. They are trying to scare you and pressure you under a “serious investigation” that you might be fired and they purposely delay telling you the outcome of the investigation to see if you will get freaked out and just quit. Word of advice. Never ever ever ever quit. You quit and you relinquish unemployment and you relinquish wrongful termination lawsuits. That exactly what they want is for you to quit.
@a7 this is correct. I found out my direct supervisor stank ranked me lowest on his team based on several factors such as performance (wasn’t even bad), culture fit/coachability, behavior issues and historical corrective actions (was not on any CA at time of layoff). He gave his rankings/input and business justification as to how he made that determination and then the SD made the final decision but for the most part trusted his judgement. This business case was then sent to HR for final approval by hr/legal. I found this out through several lengthy conversations with other people I cannot name and people a lot higher than regular HR…..lol. I also found out from HR that director supervisors make the call on your corrective action when there is an investigation. They decide if you’re getting put on a final or written etc. so when your manager gives you “hr is making me put you on a final. It’s out of my hands. I have no control hr said we had to do this. I actually fought for you I had to fight to keep your job but now I need you to do xzy for me and listen to what I say from here on out” that’s all a load of complete sh-t lol. Your manager is playing you when giving you those lines and hr told me they actually really do not like when supervisors use hr as the scapegoat for corrective action. All hr does is make sure that whatever choice your manager makes is legal and within policy to minimize lawsuits. Once he realized we were not going to be sleeping together he had been trying to work me out of the business for almost two years lol. This story ends with my manager being fired shortly after December while I ended up increasing my income by about 175%. Funny how that worked out. Do I feel bad? Nope. Sure don’t.
SD had input in November. There was a “pattern” of people on the team that were selected
Depends on org. I am a AD - November I lost 2 people and had full control. In June I lost 4 people and I did not have control.
@OP In my experience it works as follows:
1- A Senior Director requests his team of Associate Directors to stack rank their teams
2- The SD may or may not schedule a meeting with all the ADs to come up with a combined stack rank
3- A few weeks go by
4- Layoffs are announced and typically impact those lowest in the stack rank
While it's technically true that the ADs don't choose who will be laid off, they do determine the stack rank and they understand the implications.
This would make sense because we had a top performer on our team let go last year. It was pretty disheartening for sales to experience that.
I’m a Sr Manager (individual contributor). My Director (my supervisor) told me they were not involved in the decision, it was the Sr Director who picked names and didn’t inform the Director until day off layoffs.
Sometimes layoffs of % based (ie 20% across the board) and sometimes they’re financial based (ie is the person making the most money also giving the business something critical?), and sometimes they’re organizational efficiency based.
This time around it seems to be org efficiency based ie CXO, Retail store divestment to Indirect, PACT, etc
@a2 "even Dan’s VZ is not that reckless"
The POS used AI to write love poems to wife and then bragged about it to the world.
It doesn't get much more reckless than that.
Another question would be whether AI is making a fundamentally different decision than management would. It’s all based on similar metrics
I’m not in HR, but every department is using AI for this kind of thing. It’s a pretty textbook use case. So I would assume yes. There has to be some input from management, just so that you don’t seriously fu-k things up (and even Dan’s VZ is not that reckless), but I’m sure AI has a significant part in these decisions. It’s just the future.
@OP do you truly believe that someone is going to step-up and corroborate your hypothesis?