Another reason for these kind of moves is to shed workforce without going through layoffs. People with higher salaries, mortgages, houses, family will choose to resign instead relocating to TN perhaps, while new college grads, with lower salaries might be more willing to move.
I hear stuff like that a lot. But that seems like the dumbest, most passive-aggressive move ever (though I'm not denying executives can be stupid). As many have noted, it's a great way to filter out your top performers and keep all the low performers.
There's lots of examples of outcomes from moves like this in the industry, so you'd have to be pretty naive to not expect these effects. Therefore, it's more likely these outcomes are intended.
I'm ready to believe this is intended by Oracle. It's such an institutional organization at this point that they've abstracted away a lot of the impact of individual performance (high and low).
it's a great way to filter out your top performers
Huh, it is rather insulting to people who are more willing to move and also stating top performers always stay stuck to same place.
But besides all that there is ton of work large companies do which simply does not need top performers so lower cost and lower perf employee will just do fine.
Another thing is among larger tech companies Oracle is among more remote friendly for decades. So if both party agree someone can work remotely just fine.
Huh, it is rather insulting to people who are more willing to move and also stating top performers always stay stuck to same place.
Not really. I'm not stating a hard and fast rule, but a tendency. People with more options are far more likely to take action to avoid a major disruption to their lives, and people with fewer options are more likely put up with shit.
I know if my employer decided to pack up and move to a new city, I'd almost certainly prefer to take another job locally than uproot nearly everything to move with them for little to no benefit to me.
I hear stuff like that a lot. But that seems like the dumbest, most passive-aggressive move ever (though I'm not denying executives can't be stupid). As many have noted, it's a great way to filter out your top performers and keep all the low performers.
Oh, I agree. At a high enough level, bean counters just see it as a cost line in a spreadsheet. "We'll either hire H1B workers or new college grads. Look how much money we saved!"
When you're a monopoly, you don't need top performers, you need infantry that can say "yes sir"
Is Oracle actually a monopoly, though? I don't pretend to know their whole product line, but their database seems like it's in a weaker position than it's ever been, no one with any sense uses their JDK distributions, and they've got a lot of 2nd tier business apps.
Comments
I hear stuff like that a lot. But that seems like the dumbest, most passive-aggressive move ever (though I'm not denying executives can be stupid). As many have noted, it's a great way to filter out your top performers and keep all the low performers.
There's lots of examples of outcomes from moves like this in the industry, so you'd have to be pretty naive to not expect these effects. Therefore, it's more likely these outcomes are intended.
I'm ready to believe this is intended by Oracle. It's such an institutional organization at this point that they've abstracted away a lot of the impact of individual performance (high and low).
Huh, it is rather insulting to people who are more willing to move and also stating top performers always stay stuck to same place.
But besides all that there is ton of work large companies do which simply does not need top performers so lower cost and lower perf employee will just do fine.
Another thing is among larger tech companies Oracle is among more remote friendly for decades. So if both party agree someone can work remotely just fine.
Not really. I'm not stating a hard and fast rule, but a tendency. People with more options are far more likely to take action to avoid a major disruption to their lives, and people with fewer options are more likely put up with shit.
I know if my employer decided to pack up and move to a new city, I'd almost certainly prefer to take another job locally than uproot nearly everything to move with them for little to no benefit to me.
Oh, I agree. At a high enough level, bean counters just see it as a cost line in a spreadsheet. "We'll either hire H1B workers or new college grads. Look how much money we saved!"
When you're a monopoly, you don't need top performers, you need infantry that can say "yes sir"
Is Oracle actually a monopoly, though? I don't pretend to know their whole product line, but their database seems like it's in a weaker position than it's ever been, no one with any sense uses their JDK distributions, and they've got a lot of 2nd tier business apps.