• 0x0
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Somehow i doubt this’ll affect anyone with “manager”, “head”, “chief” or “officer” in the name…

    • The Hobbyist@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      22 hours ago

      They may inadvertently focus on people who spoke against the new “pro free speech” of Facebook…

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      Its most aggressive at the higher tiers, because promotions are a tool of employee retention and “flattening” the management stack is a good way of pushing out the experienced, expensive older employees. You’ll also see a lot more outsourcing of department rolls, as C-levels opt for lowest-bidder contractors you can hire/fire inside a business cycle than big teams of veteran staffers who sit on the payroll thick or thin. That means fewer mid-level managers, as the actual process of team management is sent overseas or subcontracted out to temporary management firms.

      McDonald Douglas and Yahoo both executed on this strategy back in the 90s to great effect. Stock valuations boomed, because they were able to create the illusion of cost cutting without impacting quarterly revenue. All it cost them was mountains of technical debt. And then nothing bad happened to either company.

    • GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      I’m not sure if you’re up to date on how layoffs have been done lately in tech, but management has been primary targets in layoffs. Full layers of management have been removed, and middle managers have often been expected to take on twice as many reports for no increase in compensation.

      No comments on the C-level part which is largely correct