Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?
It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.
That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.
Are 10% actually fired each year? Or no bonuses for them?
They won’t fire you on the spot. They’ll mess with your bonus and merit pay and place on PIPs and give you strong hints that things aren’t going to go well for you. There severance packages aren’t bad though. If they are nice and “abolish” your position, you can get 6-8 months severance. Othwrwise, it’s about half that. The good ‘ole boys (and girls) networks are alive and well there.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?
It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.
That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.
Are 10% actually fired each year? Or no bonuses for them?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?
It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.
That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.
Yes, they follow the GE Jack Welsh philosophy.
I agree about the "incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year"
I will add, the turnover in the IT department is huge, because of this policy.
They are going to have big problems with IT/Tech retention when Amazon lands in VA. Goofy office space and pop up Indian food stalls in the cafe’s aren’t gonna cut it.
I don’t know about that - amazon is a pretty horrible work life balance. Capital One is virtually retirement, many people I know go home at 3pm.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?
It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.
That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.
Anonymous wrote:What’s the pay structure like for a Senior Manager position in Data Analytics ? And the interview process.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?
It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.
That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.
Yes, they follow the GE Jack Welsh philosophy.
I agree about the "incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year"
I will add, the turnover in the IT department is huge, because of this policy.
They are going to have big problems with IT/Tech retention when Amazon lands in VA. Goofy office space and pop up Indian food stalls in the cafe’s aren’t gonna cut it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?
It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.
That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?
It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.
That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.
Yes, they follow the GE Jack Welsh philosophy.
I agree about the "incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year"
I will add, the turnover in the IT department is huge, because of this policy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?
It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.
That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?
It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.
That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.
Are 10% actually fired each year? Or no bonuses for them?
They won’t fire you on the spot. They’ll mess with your bonus and merit pay and place on PIPs and give you strong hints that things aren’t going to go well for you. There severance packages aren’t bad though. If they are nice and “abolish” your position, you can get 6-8 months severance. Othwrwise, it’s about half that. The good ‘ole boys (and girls) networks are alive and well there.