Re:Cisco Workforce Reductions
by 0xbadcafebee on Wednesday May 13, 2026 @11:15PM
(#48130684)
The casualness of mentioning record revenues in the same PR statement as laying off 4,000 people is fucked up on a new level. It used to be you were supposed to at least pretend you were forced into a layoff. But now it's like "Hey guys! It's time for our regularly scheduled layoff to juice profits! I got an extra $5M bonus for this!"
[ Parent
| on HN ]
What’s really weird to me is they clearly wanted to convey to the Street that these layoffs were _not_ motivated by any of their financial results with the phrasing “fewer than 4,000”. But they conspicuously didn’t provide any other reason. No divisions closing down, no realignment of capital.
I wonder if someone in the C-suite simply decided that they had some rough percentage of underperformers on the payroll, but they can’t publicly call them performance based terminations without triggering a risk of lawsuits.
Re:Cisco Workforce Reductions
by alistairSH on Thursday May 14, 2026 @08:33AM
(#48134483)
It's 100% normal these days. My employer did the same thing in January.
Re:Cisco Workforce Reductions
by eurekahalting on Tuesday May 19, 2026 @02:31AM
(#48189955)
Normalized, but not normal