L5 is supposed to be a “terminal level” so there isn’t an expectation for employees to want to advance further. But perhaps there are some implicit assumptions on max tenure at that level.
Agree with what you said otherwise.
That being said, I doubt it was mostly targeting people who were tenured too long without enough promos. My guess is these are people without the full backing of their upper mgmnt chain. Since even directors had no input into this layoff round, you needed your VP's support.
Added: maybe the person above is right since the grad changes are already moving G's culture into a more aggressive mode. G will slowly become like the other big tech companies (G will just pay slightly less since people will still have the outdated perception that the culture is better).
Large layoffs are typically discussed and orchestrated only at the highest levels of management, so if you're an IC if you want to be protected you need to be on the radar of your boss's boss's boss's boss (or something like that). And I think you're right that someone who sat at L5/L6 for 15+ years wouldn't be a stand out at that level by any stretch.
It doesn’t sound very nice but it’s fair.