not to let the process drag on. “The worst thing people can do is to do it very slowly and painfully,” said Kairong Xiao, associate professor of finance at Columbia Business School. “If you say, ‘we’re going to do it in three months,’ during those three months no one is getting work done.”
Goldman, which is cutting 3,200 jobs, 6.5 per cent of its headcount, moved more slowly. Team leaders were instructed in early December to draw up lists of employees who could be let go. News of the planned cull leaked, kicking off weeks of uncertainty about who was on the way out.Article content Internal discussions on workplace communications tool Slack, seen by the Financial Times, showed frustrated employees feeling they had been left in the dark. In an interview shortly after the losses were announced, Jassy told the FT his company had no intention of any more cuts.Article contentOnce the need for job losses is clear, companies have choices about where to make them. It can be easy to target the most recent arrivals, management experts say.
Chief executive Jim Farley estimates that about 40 per cent fewer people will be needed to build electric models in future because they contain fewer parts and are simpler to design and engineer.
Maybe they should use better hiring practices first instead of bloating up their rosters like they did during the pandemic. It still fascinates me how they hire by the thousands knowing those thousands will be on the chopping block sooner rather than later.
Diversity Equity and Inclusion and other meaningless fake jobs will go first. Good riddance.
'Eeny, meeny, miny, moe'
Management who make the most money?
I have an IDEA … Fire those who were hired based on the Acronym. I (Identity) D (Diversity) E (Equity) A (Appearance)