Join the discussion — anonymously
Sign in to comment, reply, and vote. Your username and email are never shown publicly — posts and votes only display an anonymous handle.
Comments (2)
That sounds exactly like my department. It’s the classic corporate squeeze where they keep the headcount down to pad the quarterly numbers while expecting us to pick up the slack of three people. Don't fall for the 'prioritize effectively' nonsense; it’s just management’s way of washing their hands of the fact that they've set impossible goals. Start documenting everything you do and don't feel obligated to work extra hours to cover for the missing staff. They won't hire replacements until they absolutely have to, so you might as well protect your own mental health first.
It’s frustrating because we used to have a real focus on long-term project stability, but lately, everything is about short-term optics. I suspect you’re right about them keeping the roles open to inflate the bottom line ahead of a potential shift. Many of us are seeing the same pattern across different branches. It’s a cynical way to operate, but at this point, expecting support or a reasonable workload seems like a lost cause. Just do what you can during your core hours and don't burn yourself out trying to meet unrealistic quotas for people who won't advocate for you.