Feeds

back to article Microsoft swings axe at 'hundreds' of jobs globally

Hundreds of jobs have reportedly been slashed at Microsoft offices across the globe, but the company is keeping quiet about the staff cuts. TechFlash reported yesterday that Microsoft was set to cull a small number of its 88,596 worldwide workforce. Microsoft hasn’t commented on the layoffs, but neither has it gone on record to …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Anonymous Coward

"from the 64 to 68 level"

Can anyone explain what that means? Is it jargon only understood by cult members?

3
0
Gates Horns

Is it....

... some sort of IQ measurement?

3
0

My guesses

Floors in an HQ building? Either that or the MS management system is seriously stratified.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Title

It's basically job levels, and means middle to middle/senior management.

0
0

Justification?

What's the justification for making layoffs? "Sorry guys we only made $10bn profit this year, gonna have to tighten that belt" ?!

1
0
FAIL

Before laying people off...

Maybe they could fix the bogus XP, Win7, and Vista Error 1625 - the equivalent of the BSOD for installing apps on a computer where you -are- the administrator, have all administrator privileges, but the highly-flawed Windows Installer program can't read the Windows Registry correctly.

It can't be TOO difficult, Adobe wrote its own installer which reads the registry correctly.

1
0
Bronze badge

What a dreadful thought - 64 -68

That there might be that many levels of seniority. Seven in my multi-national. Mind you it doesn't necessarily make the leadership any better.

The bigger the company, the less leadership, the more a%£e covering. The bigger the company the less control you have over the bottom rungs, and the easier it is to rule by spreadsheet, this is why accountants do so well in big companies, as the only people who can get excited by a spreadsheet.

My advice to Bill, is don't go back, it isn't the same company, and it's too big to change back now.

2
0
Gates Halo

@Steward

On Windows systems, just because you are logged on as Administrator, doesn't neccassarily give you full access to everything - files or Registry settings.

Objects can have Access Control Lists set so that Admins still have no access, or only read access maybe.

0
0
Jobs Horns

64-68

Microsoft "Levels" govern your title and salary band.

65 for instance is a Director or Snr Manager

(the higher the number the better)

66 and above is where the real big bucks and benefits kick in these days but sadly most of the culling never impacts at that level ... they just go on to screw up a different division a few times (with promotions along the way for morale) and then "leave to spend more time with theif family" just after a big stock grant happens

SteveB, LisaB need to wake up and smell the roses. the problem isn't that BillG isn't coming back, it's that no-one has the balls to actually change his "legacy" and dare to say that perhaps there's an iceberg ahead

3
0
Thumb Down

'Better'

Please define your use of 'better' as it pertains to Microsoft.

0
0
Bronze badge

Age range?

I thought it was an age thing, many people and companies look at people in that age range when layoffs come around. Not agreeing with it, just a fact.

1
0

The truth finally

Demotivated staff would explain why Microsoft products suck big time.

I used to work for a major software company that kept such an incredibly tight lid on their staff to the extent that if you were away from your desk for 10 minutes, you would have to give an account to your manager. Development staff were constricted to churning out systems written to a tight spec. In that respect, software development was nothing more than factory work. Morale was below ground level but no one could leave as it was during the recession of the 90's but the company made huge profits which benefitted only the shareholders. The staff got nothing - after all, the country was in a recession.

The result was a "couldn't care less" attitude. Developers did the minimum and as long as the job ticked all the boxes on the spec. No spec could cover all holes so products were released looking like Swiss cheese. We had customers complaining but no one cared - another round of development, another round of cheese with less holes in.

As the recession lifted, development staff began to leave and it finally dawned on management that their US profit-maximising style did not exactly translate into UK work ethics. As far as I know, the company went into a contrary downhill slide in a period of national growth when it should have grown even bigger, and it was eventually merged with a competitor. Currently you don't hear of them any more other than in a very niche market. They are now a shadow of what they used to be. Terrible shame, but I am sure the then CEO and his cronies would have had enormous redundancies on their way out.

1
0
N2

What a mess

But then they appointed Steve (substitute comment of choice) Ballmer as CEO

Not exactly the leadership by example model anyone or any other company would want to follow, unless they were on a serious 'downsizing' mission.

2
0
Silver badge

64-68

Didn't Microsoft say 64 job levels would be enough for everybody?

Of course at HP you would have a simple 64bit job level, with each bit encoding for a specific responsibility. I always got the feeling that the original HP was created by Vulcans.

1
0
Jobs Horns

Heh nice comment about HP

I love the vulcans being in there. But looking at it it does make sense....

"I feel that there is no way to change the negative course we are on, and Microsoft is incurably on a path to be only a shell of the company it once was."

Now fan-boi that I am when it comes to gaming I will say that if MS starts to flounder as it seems they are starting to (dont say they arnt definately seeing more and more negative about MS these days) will be a shame for gamers everywhere. And just think who would step in to fill the void? Apple with St. Jobs at the helm? Dear god no.

0
0

Lay Offs?

Odd they phoned me up this week with a view to head hunt me. I'm committed to another job for a while. MS is a big company (but not as big as us!) so the idea that some bits close and others expand shouldn't be a shock.

0
0
Gates Horns

Snews

M$ just does not want to admit laying off more in the US while hiring in Vietnam and India while taking handouts in the USA.

I'm sure BillWG will be going to Washington again to demand removal of the visa caps.

0
0
Alert

Micro Surprise

"Microsoft swings axe at 'hundreds' of jobs globally

Staff complain about lack of leadership"

...and customers complain about lack of security.

“Microsoft has become its own worst enemy..."

...and he didn't even mention the quality of their software!

0
1
Silver badge
Gates Horns

"...and he didn't even mention the quality of their software!"

Why mention something that's never existed?

0
3

Underperformers?

From what i understand, and it is purely a guess, but it looks like someone in the throne room has decided to remove those that the crown wearer has identified as no longer an asset to the kingdom.

It happens regular, as most Windows users will testify...............

0
0
Grenade

MS in Deeee Kline

Haaaaa they only need a staff of about 10.

One to redesign the packets the rehashed software comes in.

One to rehash the software by coding it to do different stupid stuff.

One to make the coffee.

One to answer the phone.

One to feed the script monkeys peanuts.

One to get the bags of peanuts.

One to cruise the web looking for sources of (ahem) inspiration....

One to market the "WE thought of that" as being innovative.

One to replace the tapes in the complaints answering machine.

One to take down the credit card numbers and make the cash come in.

One to throw meat to the lawyers, and tell them "They stole our idea that we stole off them".

One to study the goings on of catholic priests into child molesting and use their invasive techniques to "ingratiate their ways into the lives of customers".

0
1
Gates Halo

Some people just don't understand business

There's a recession. It affects the operational margins of all businesses, regardless of how much profit is made. Why do people think that just because a company makes $10bn profit it should continue to employ redundant resources. Business is business, it's not about people, it's about shareholder value and a good balance sheet.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.