This company just went through a RIF (Reduction In Force). While if got rid of a lot of useless debris, it also threw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. Previous complaints about the CEO, Dan, have been replaced about the new CEO, Ed. He pretends to be more hands-on and open, but the secretaries uphold the same "guardian of the gate" mentality so they execs can claim plausible deniability.
It's one thing for the executive team to say they're all about change; and it's likely they are. But internally the communication is as unapproachable as always. I think a true management turnover involves a completely new mindset. If the organization is to pull together and stop the bleeding, they need to let the people access management.
Beyond that, the recent RIF was handled BADLY. They announced that there would be reductions weeks in advance, and left everyone to wonder if they were on the chopping block. Some called it "death by a thousand cuts" in that instead of just doing it, they announced it and made people suffer needlessly. It was such bad form that after it was done even the good people who escaped it ended up resigning either for self-preservation or solidarity. Completely bad form. I can't imagine the parent company, Boeing, agreeing to this fiasco. They generated more ill will that any other myriad of failures. I expected that after they fired the CEO and CFO they meant business, but it's business as usual. Nothing has changed. The CEO still flies First Class and that's all that matters.
