News Intel Relaxes Hiring Policy, as It Searches for More Talent

[Admin]

Back in 2015 Intel, went through a significant restructuring process. The CEO at the time thought he was molding a different company, and thus people affected by the mass layoffs were excluded from upcoming vacancies.

Intel Relaxes Hiring Policy, as It Searches for More Talent : Read more

 

[LastStanding]

We're trying to build a different company. You don't orchestrate change by doing things the same way.

Brian Krzanich most definitely had the right idea (I mean... just look at how terrible NVIDIA's, etc. software has been, for years now, under its current untalented software staff) but it was the woke mob that pressured Krzanich to surrender but no one should never... ever give attention or surrender to these obvious attention-seekers.

On the surface that might sound logical, but people are very adaptable

That's a double-edged sword idea (and unproven to function for every company), though. Sure, some people COULD be versatile for change but the last few years have shown the opposite and instead, many of them have shown to be too relaxed, workplace drama divas, division, complacency, etc., and if a team has lost its luster, well, its time for restructuring or risk losing everything just for untalents.

 

[Deleted member 14196]

Here’s what you do when you wanna clean house. You walk in and tell everybody you’re paying them half of what they’re making. The ones that stay you fire. You rehire the ones who leave at considerably more than their former salary. Problem solved. All the slabs that wanna hang on to their jobs are now gone and they are the useless ones who don’t want to work anyway. LOL

 

[hotaru.hino]

Here’s what you do when you wanna clean house. You walk in and tell everybody you’re paying them half of what they’re making. The ones that stay you fire. You rehire the ones who leave at considerably more than their former salary. Problem solved. All the slabs that wanna hang on to their jobs are now gone and they are the useless ones who don’t want to work anyway. LOL

Even if the pay was significantly greater, why would anyone want to go back to the company after they 1. cut everyone's pay and 2. let go of people who stay on the assumption they're just scags?

 

[Co BIY]

I've heard that Jack Welch at GE had a guideline that you should fire 10% of your people every year.

Sounds cruel and counterproductive .................... but naming at least 5% always seems pretty easy.


I think the presumption is when someone leaves that it is usually for a good reason. If I have an employee leave but would be very happy as a supervisor to have them back I always put that in my exit paperwork. HR will rarely come take the time to come track down the former boss if the employee puts in an app but they are sure to review the exit paperwork.

 

[shady28]

I've heard that Jack Welch at GE had a guideline that you should fire 10% of your people every year.

Sounds cruel and counterproductive .................... but naming at least 5% always seems pretty easy.


I think the presumption is when someone leaves that it is usually for a good reason. If I have an employee leave but would be very happy as a supervisor to have them back I always put that in my exit paperwork. HR will rarely come take the time to come track down the former boss if the employee puts in an app but they are sure to review the exit paperwork.

This is actually de rigueur in most companies. Those thought processes came out more than 20 years ago and permeate corporate America.

On the surface, it makes sense. However what happens in the real world is that as execs rotate in and out, then the VPs rotate in and out, then the Directors, then the managers, and then core workers with institutional knowledge. It eventually hollows the companies out, and even when some core of experienced people stay - there's no bench, and those people eventually retire.

 

[KyaraM]

Here’s what you do when you wanna clean house. You walk in and tell everybody you’re paying them half of what they’re making. The ones that stay you fire. You rehire the ones who leave at considerably more than their former salary. Problem solved. All the slabs that wanna hang on to their jobs are now gone and they are the useless ones who don’t want to work anyway. LOL

That's the worst idea I have ever heard. And complete bs on top...

 

[Zarax]

Here’s what you do when you wanna clean house. You walk in and tell everybody you’re paying them half of what they’re making. The ones that stay you fire. You rehire the ones who leave at considerably more than their former salary. Problem solved. All the slabs that wanna hang on to their jobs are now gone and they are the useless ones who don’t want to work anyway. LOL

Steve Ballmer, is that you?
Seriously, the "fire the bottom X percent every year" strategy has been tried and almost killed several companies, it turns out there are several things you cannot measure on standard company KPIs...

 

[LastStanding]

Steve Ballmer, is that you?
Seriously, the "fire the bottom X percent every year" strategy has been tried and almost killed several companies, it turns out there are several things you cannot measure on standard company KPIs...

No. What almost killed these companies was due to, in most cases, how much damage they had allowed these untalents to do to their business and it took years before they decided to gain a backbone to do anything about it.

You're basically saying is, these companies should keep these inferior employees because it better to have something compared to nothing. 😏

 

[Deleted member 14196]

That's the worst idea I have ever heard. And complete bs on top...

it was a joke.. lol

 

[Deleted member 14196]

Steve Ballmer, is that you?
Seriously, the "fire the bottom X percent every year" strategy has been tried and almost killed several companies, it turns out there are several things you cannot measure on standard company KPIs...

i put an lol in it.. it was more of a stupid joke... lolz

oh and I actually knew the guy who said it too... not a real bright bulb if you know what I mean

 

[Deleted member 14196]

No. What almost killed these companies was due to, in most cases, how much damage they had allowed these untalents to do to their business and it took years before they decided to gain a backbone to do anything about it.

You're basically saying is, these companies should keep these inferior employees because it better to have something compared to nothing. 😏

No he just didn't agree with my joke of how to weed out the lackluster employees. I am sure there are really good ways to go about it, but HR isn't my bag

i knew a guy who actaully thought that would work, i thought it would be funny to see what kind of reaction it got. it's as I expected.

 

[KyaraM]

oh and I actually knew the guy who said it too... not a real bright bulb if you know what I mean

I can see that he wasn't, lmao.

 

[Kurdain1]

The biggest issue is, having worked for Intel more than once, is usually pay.
A great example was over the last year I interviewed for several positions, technical writing and project management roles.
Take technical writing for example.
None of the offers were direct hires from Intel, all were contract with no benefits.
Pay ranged from $23/hr to $35/hr, no benefits, - with lots of experience, sometimes certifications, and other requirements.
Remote work wasn't an option post covid.
Very similar roles at Amazon or Facebook for example, most were direct hire, pay was almost always above $50/hr, with benefits. 100% remote.

Close friend on mine interviewed for an engineering position. She has 20 years experience, 2x bachelor degrees and a masters degree all in related fields. The best Intel could do was $26/hr or around $55k/yr. Really?

You can't find talent when you are paying 1/2 the market rate, often less than.

I left Intel the first time because I read an actual offer letter for the exact same position, in the same location, with the same education that was paying $5/hr more than I was making. I had 12 years experience, the new guy had none. Approaching HR about it, after I had another offer in hand, and wanting to stay at Intel they refused to speak to me other than 'they don't match offers - bye".

IMHO stories like that is Intel's biggest hurdle. I have dozens more about Intel doing the wrong thing to their employees over the years.

To be fair Nike is the same as Intel, at least in the hiring practices in my experience.

One last thing the recent announcement about the Ohio factory paying an average $130k/yr to their workers.
I can 100% assure you there is no way they are paying the majority of their workforce, especially manufacturing, anywhere close to even 50% of that. Such a misleading headline.

 

[jkflipflop98]

The biggest issue is, having worked for Intel more than once, is usually pay.
A great example was over the last year I interviewed for several positions, technical writing and project management roles.
Take technical writing for example.
None of the offers were direct hires from Intel, all were contract with no benefits.
Pay ranged from $23/hr to $35/hr, no benefits, - with lots of experience, sometimes certifications, and other requirements.
Remote work wasn't an option post covid.
Very similar roles at Amazon or Facebook for example, most were direct hire, pay was almost always above $50/hr, with benefits. 100% remote.

Close friend on mine interviewed for an engineering position. She has 20 years experience, 2x bachelor degrees and a masters degree all in related fields. The best Intel could do was $26/hr or around $55k/yr. Really?

You can't find talent when you are paying 1/2 the market rate, often less than.

I left Intel the first time because I read an actual offer letter for the exact same position, in the same location, with the same education that was paying $5/hr more than I was making. I had 12 years experience, the new guy had none. Approaching HR about it, after I had another offer in hand, and wanting to stay at Intel they refused to speak to me other than 'they don't match offers - bye".

IMHO stories like that is Intel's biggest hurdle. I have dozens more about Intel doing the wrong thing to their employees over the years.

To be fair Nike is the same as Intel, at least in the hiring practices in my experience.

One last thing the recent announcement about the Ohio factory paying an average $130k/yr to their workers.
I can 100% assure you there is no way they are paying the majority of their workforce, especially manufacturing, anywhere close to even 50% of that. Such a misleading headline.

Your entire anecdote here is a complete fabrication.

Engineers don't get paid hourly. The starting base pay for an engineering position in Intel is $90k a year for a low level engineer.

 

[Kurdain1]

Sorry you feel that way but this is exactly what they offered her, I converted the yearly salary to hourly so it was easier to compare with the earlier examples. She was offered 55k/yr. She was very disappointed, as you could imagine.
Oregon, Aloha campus.
Process Engineer.

As for the rest I don't know what to tell you. I worked there for 12 years, I left for the exact reason I listed.
The job offers were real, again don't know what to tell you.

EDIT
I should add that she is in talks again with an Intel position.
She is on her 4th interview, they want background checks, and have already stated they want her to join their team.
She is well qualified for the role.
They REFUSE to discuss any pay rates, usually stating that they (interviewing engineers and managers) don't know and it will be offered through HR. So, again - not sure what to say.

Your entire anecdote here is a complete fabrication.

Engineers don't get paid hourly. The starting base pay for an engineering position in Intel is $90k a year for a low level engineer.

 

[Eximo]

Sounds like you were coming in on the contractor side of things only. I've been in that position. Intel is probably paying 90k a year for those positions, but contracting it out and the contracting house is pocketing the difference. But it allows big companies flexibility and they don't have to report it as payroll but contracted services.

 

[Kurdain1]

Sounds like you were coming in on the contractor side of things only. I've been in that position. Intel is probably paying 90k a year for those positions, but contracting it out and the contracting house is pocketing the difference. But it allows big companies flexibility and they don't have to report it as payroll but contracted services.

I was 12 years as a blue badge.
Recently I am back as a contractor and making a far better wage.

Every offer over the last year, for me, was always through contractors but even still it's a huge gap given other companies - contract or not.
My wife, every offer for her has been direct hire blue badge offers - she's turned them all down as she makes more money where she is at but really wants a change.

2 of my buddies have remained at Intel after I left and now have more than 20 years there, according to them neither of them makes more than 75k. One is an operations manager (salaried) and the other is an equipment lead. Sure they could both be lying but don't see why they would.
They complain constantly about it, I feel bad for them because they work hard and are good people.