Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Intel Businesses

Intel Plans Fresh Round of Layoffs, Other Cost Cuts (oregonlive.com) 33

Intel plans a fresh wave of layoffs in the wake of a steep decline in revenue over the last six months. The chipmaker, Oregon's largest corporate employer, blames a weak global economy. From a report: "We are focused on identifying cost reductions and efficiency gains through multiple initiatives, including some business and function-specific workforce reductions in areas across the company," Intel said in a written statement. "These are difficult decisions, and we are committed to treating impacted employees with dignity and respect," Intel said.

Dylan Patel with the technology research firm SemiAnalysis first reported the pending cuts over the weekend. Intel didn't say what else it's cutting, in what areas, or how these layoffs compare to a prior round of job cuts that ended last winter. Intel laid off more than 500 employees in California in job cuts announced last fall, according to filings there with state workforce agencies. It laid off employees in Oregon, too, but didn't make a similar filing here, suggesting that the layoffs represented a smaller percentage of the company's local workforce. Intel employs more than 22,000 at its Washington County campuses.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel Plans Fresh Round of Layoffs, Other Cost Cuts

Comments Filter:
  • by garyisabusyguy ( 732330 ) on Monday May 08, 2023 @12:25PM (#63506849)

    Wasn't it just a month ago that Intel was touting how they were going to out innovate AMD and other competitors to make themselves a market leader etc...

    And, now here we are seeing Intel act like any other matured business and forsaking investment in favor of cutting costs

    jmo, but succumbing to MBA-led cost cutting exercises is _not_ how companies create new products, or leap frog their competitors into new markets

    This just makes Intel look as dead as they likely are

    • by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Monday May 08, 2023 @12:32PM (#63506879)

      Innovation is difficult when you spend all your reserves on stock buybacks.

      https://www.reuters.com/busine... [reuters.com]
      https://ycharts.com/companies/... [ycharts.com]

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      jmo, but succumbing to MBA-led cost cutting exercises is _not_ how companies create new products, or leap frog their competitors into new markets

      This just makes Intel look as dead as they likely are

      Ah, but let's reinforce this behavior year after year after year by rewarding MBAs with employment that validates that "education".

      I'd love a multi-decade long study on that particular career field to determine if it's actually more financially ethical than managing a cartel dog fighting ring. Or has proven to be financially beneficial in the long run for anyone other than those padding executive bonuses.

    • Wasn't it just a month ago that Intel was touting how they were going to out innovate AMD and other competitors to make themselves a market leader etc...

      And, now here we are seeing Intel act like any other matured business and forsaking investment in favor of cutting costs

      jmo, but succumbing to MBA-led cost cutting exercises is _not_ how companies create new products, or leap frog their competitors into new markets

      This just makes Intel look as dead as they likely are

      The unfortunate part is that CEO Pat Gels

      • by larryjoe ( 135075 ) on Monday May 08, 2023 @02:41PM (#63507227)

        The unfortunate part is that CEO Pat Gelsinger is an experienced design engineer who was directly involved with many of Intel's successful products in the 80's. He was supposed to rid Intel of the MBA mindset and steer the company back onto a course of technical excellence.

        Instead, Intel has doubled down on the "raise the stock price above all else" philosophy. Sometimes the job changes the person more than the person changes the job.

        I don't blame Gelsinger. The system he operates in strongly motivates him to act in the interest of short-term stock appreciation. That is, he is strongly motivated to cut short-term operating costs (e.g., layoffs) because revenue tends to exhibit short-term hysteresis, so the quarterly reports look good. That's also why stock buybacks look so good, as they boost short-term numbers while doing nothing for future growth.

        The way to change Gelsinger and other CEOs is to make their compensation based on longer-term corporate performance. Give him hundreds of millions based on Intel revenue and market share 3-5 years in the future, and give him almost nothing in the next 1-2 years. Of course, no corporation works that way, because no CEO wants that challenge and risk. They want the easy money now, even though that incentivizes them to wreck the company in the long term.

    • LOL that's funny. If there's one thing that is abundantly clear by now: big companies CAN'T FUCKING INNOVATE!

      The best they can do is to find a small company doing what they want to do and then buy it. But the very culture and structure of a large corporation makes any real innovation untenable.

    • It's a cycle (Score:4, Interesting)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Monday May 08, 2023 @01:47PM (#63507091)
      You do layoffs, push everyone to work 80 hr/wk, just before they burn out and find new jobs you ramp up hiring and get them back to around 50-55 hr/wk. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

      It's a technique for maximizing labor value pioneered by MBAs. I only just recently heard about it. When they talk about it they use all sorts of euphemisms, so unless you're knee deep in MBA Jargon you wouldn't have heard of it (I certainly hadn't).
      • Interesting. Sounds plausible. Also sounds exceptionally risky. Mistime the rehiring cycle by 2 months and you set the company back by a full year. Not a good idea when there are competitors out there sniffing around for weakness.

        Links? Id like to read more about this, havent heard of it before.
        • we stopped enforcing anti-trust law 40 years ago. Even without the mega mergers if you look at who owns all the voting shares of stock it's the same handful of billionaires and multi-multi-millionaires. So it doesn't matter if they fall behind a year. There's nobody there to leap ahead of them and take the market share away. And even if somebody did, who cares? The owners win either way.

          Like Carlan said, it's a Big Club and you ain't in it.
      • Yes, long term employees tend to get paid in the upper third of the salary band for their position.

        This technique pushes the high earners out and replaces them with people in the lower third of their pay band.

        It is a huge win for the companies, but can hamstring people in the later stages of their careers and send them into retirement lacking funds and un-prepared

  • by crow ( 16139 ) on Monday May 08, 2023 @12:59PM (#63506973) Homepage Journal

    And today Dell announced that they want most employees to return to the office three days a week. I can't help but wonder if the objective is to reduce staff. It's also possible they just picked the timing for when they figured the fewest employees would feel safe jumping ship, with announcements like the Intel layoffs discouraging people from leaving.

    • It would be interesting to go back over the past 12-18 months and see whether all the heads of these major tech organizations were all at some specific conference / retreat at the same time.

      I'm not saying they're colluding and coordinating these layoffs in an attempt to claw back power from their workers... but I'm certainly thinking it loudly.

      • Or it could be the fact that worldwide PC shipments declined 30% in first quarter of 2023.

        Nah, it must be the conspiracy you just made up.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Shortsighted (Score:5, Insightful)

    by leehwtsohg ( 618675 ) on Monday May 08, 2023 @01:02PM (#63506977)

    One thing that these companies collectively don't get is that every time they fire a worker, they are also firing a customer.

  • Instead of all that tedious research, development and production stuff, they now endeavor into the soaring market of war profiteering. Just collect tax payer money to rebuild factories you once sold or moved to remote countries. Then sell those factories again, for profit, and start the next cycle of lobbying for rebuilding factories because, you know, baddies are threatening war, again.

Overload -- core meltdown sequence initiated.

Working...