Thread regarding Fannie Mae layoffs

They really need to get rid of more directors and VPs instead of ICs

OK, so I have sympathy for everyone who's impacted, and nobody deserves this. They don't need to get rid of all the directors and VPs because some of them actually know what they're doing. But seriously, and objectively, they should get rid of the ones who have no understanding of the ins and outs of the team. Their biggest contributions are taking credit for their managers' and ICs' work, creating unnecessary bureaucracy, and dragging everyone into endless, pointless meetings. The team/org would honestly run much better without them.


by
| 3 views | | 7 replies (last 28 days ago) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kysy5q73

7 replies (most recent on top)

@mq The passive brag there was my favorite. People doing minor things and then bragging in meetings they supposedly worked "extra hours" or did all this extra work to look like they are so committed to the company. In most of those cases these people couldn't finish their job in a normal day and were overall useless but had to make it appear they are very important.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rs+1kysy5q73

man I feel you so much. we already had a few cut from our larger org, but honestly all the ICs are miserable right now. the biggest issue is that management just doesn’t respect the amount of work that goes into keeping all the day-to-day processes running smoothly. they have no idea how much effort it takes behind the scenes to make sure things don’t break, and they just take it for granted. the irony is that the people who do the most work are usually the ones who get criticized the most, because when you’re actually doing things, you’re bound to have a few things slip through the cracks. meanwhile the people who are great at talking but don’t actually execute anything rarely get called out because they never put themselves in a position where they can fail. yhey just sound good in meetings, get visibility, and somehow end up being the ones who get recognized and rewarded.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @mq+1kysy5q73

Our team had a director cut in the last round for pretty much this exact reason. He wasn’t very familiar with some of the basic stuff. We are not saying management needs to know every single process or personally pull excel data or run python, but every time he’d have someone do the work, he wouldn’t spend any time trying to understand the basic logic behind it. That’s what really rubbed people the wrong way. It wasn’t that he asked questions, it was that he never bothered to learn from the answers or build any understanding himself. From what I heard, three or four ICs and managers ended up complaining to the VP.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @k5+1kysy5q73

Maybe they will keep the higher management people and actually force them to do some actual work when there is nobody left underneath them to do it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ee+1kysy5q73

Someone got axed on my team. Guess the co-presidents (really, grift much?) need co-raises. Any leadership coming onboard after Pulte self-installed is sus

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ah+1kysy5q73

Preach! I actually didnt have a Director until early this year! Now they have eliminated 60% of my team but added a Director! Legit insanity.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ab+1kysy5q73

Majority of them are absolute wa-kers. Attend meetings and use chatgpt once a month to produce a deck. Their regurgitated "strategic" decisions can be literally derived from chatgpt 1.0.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a4+1kysy5q73

Post a reply

: