I can. Meta is a huge company. I'd want them to cut the slackers. I hate lazy co-workers. Only reason to worry or be upset is if you-yourself, are a "poor performing employee".
>“We typically manage out people who aren’t meeting expectations over the course of a year, but now we’re going to do more extensive performance-based cuts during this cycle.”
I would assume the managing out people is dealing with the slackers. The idea that "x% of our workforce is underperforming and should be let go" on a regular basis (5-10% every few years seems to be the current trend) on top of that is a fun thing re-emerging in tech where these companies think a hard internal focus on performance will result in the best employees sticking around and them hiring 'performance focused' engineers.
The inevitable result is the next wave of companies to get back on the 'we treat our employees like humans and care about your wellbeing' will hoover up all the best of the new and recently disenchanted and highly capable experienced engineers and developers while those with the highest threshold for abuse are the ones actually retained in these companies.
As Microsoft, IBM and numerous other organizations have shown, stack ranking is one of the worst ways to assess who to cut. It solves the C-suite issue of cutting the headcount quickly to satiate shareholders, but doesn't solve the manager's problem of making cuts in a way that allows performance to remain high.
