More layoffs at Microsoft
MICROSOFT IS FINISHING what it started back in January, laying off more employees today with CEO Steve Ballmer noting "we are mostly but not all done."
Back in the new year, Ballmer announced the Vole's plans to slim down by some 5,000 employees by 2010 in a "plan to adjust the company's cost structure through spending reductions and job eliminations."
"Today, we are implementing the second phase of this plan," Ballmer said in a company memo, adding it was "difficult news to share" and that "eliminating positions is hard."
Ballmer said employees in the US being layed off would hear from their managers today, whilst employees in other Micro$haft offices worldwide would be told by their local teams.
The Vole's CEO said he would "continue to closely monitor the impact of the economic downturn on the company and if necessary, take further actions on our cost structure including additional job eliminations."
Rubbing salt in the freshly reopened wounds, Ballmer added he appreciated the way pink slipped employees had "pulled together to help the company respond to this difficult economic environment" and assured them the firm would "continue to provide support as we did during the previous job eliminations."
Unfortunately for ex-employees, that support most likely won't extend to helping them pay their mortgages or cover their children's education. µ
Share this:
ShareBusiness Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
Wouldn't be great if the great Ballmer will fire himself ?
Find a Indian bald-headed dude to run the company for fraction of the price.
The corporate mentality is so disgusting. This is a company that makes billions in profits every single quarter and will likely continue to yet they are laying people off. It certainly demonstrates just how little they care about their employees.
MS as any corporation exists for one single reason - make money for its owner. they want more and more of it and thats not right or wrong, its human nature. and as such they are in constant search how to increase money intake. at a times it means hiring people, at a times the other way around. why should they keep paying those they not in need of?
when my kid finally goes to kindergarten we will let his sitter go. we make enough to keep her but, we will still let her go. unsentimental me...
You would care if it was your job. And it is not likely true that the jobs that are being let go are "unnecessary" very likely those people will be replaced with others. A small fraction of Balmers bonuses would probably pay for those employees.... Too much fat on top, and too thin on the bottom. In the information age we think we have gotten past the ages of Kings and Knights and serfs but it back to that after 400 years of "progress"
... Creating or keeping jobs simply for the sake of jobs. If you're redundant, you're redundant, it's just how it is when the market is cold. Find a different job or make yourself more valuable so you're not axed first.
When you create or enforce "lifetime jobs" it makes the selection process all the more difficult, and as a result there are fewer jobs available in the first place. Better to have the flexibility to earn and keep a good job based on your merit, than be prevented from having the job because it is perpetually filled. Go to France if you want perpetual employment--if you can get a job in the first place.
...clearing out the staff responsible for creating Fista...
Mass layoffs, of a profitable tech company with cash reserves, made as an attempt to cut costs and enhance profits is a bad long term strategy and a sign of bad management. A better strategy would be to use the current profitability and cash reserves to re-train or re-task talent in attempts to create new products, markets or sources of revenue. The assumption in this strategy is that profitability will return by cutting costs (I don't need workers so I will get rid of them), but that is short term thinking for a tech company. If you still have some profitability and cash reserves a longer term strategy is based on the future (I have an underused resource that I can task or train to explore new markets or develop new sources of revenue). Profitability is not really enhanced simply by cutting costs through mass layoffs, all you get is a short term bump. Such a decision only makes sense if your company is in danger and you are willing to sacrifice market share or future profits for immediate survival. This is a stupid move.
It can't release a bug-free product, but it can get so called highly technical people overseas to do the job cheaper. Its the SOS.
I just purchased Vista 64 with SP1, I also had to down load about 60 updates in excess of 300MB. What a joke.
But it's no surprise, no other company anywhere could issue a product that requires so many defect corrections. They don't care about the product, so why expect they care about the people?
H1-Bs are just corporate slavery. Lobbying should be a capital crime.
"Go to France if you want perpetual employment--if you can get a job in the first place."
Google France and USA unemployment rates and see the hard truth for yourself.
http://www.google.com.br/search?q=france+unemployment
http://www.google.com.br/search?q=usa+unemployment