Business Big Tech Layoffs Megathread - Techbros... we got too cocky...

  • ⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Since my previous thread kinda-sorta turned into a soft megathread, and the tech layoffs will continue until morale improves, I think it's better to group them all together.

For those who want a QRD:


Just this week we've had these going on:

1706112535506.png

1706112610401.png

1706112702576.png

But it's not just Big Tech, the vidya industry is also cleaning house bigly:

1706112854585.png

All in all, rough seas ahead for the techbros.
 
Forcing a role transfers are legally difficult because if they shovel you over in a "sink or swim" then fire you when you suck or struggle at the new role, they open themselves up to liability for very expensive Constructive Dismissal lawsuits - looks like setting someone up to fail to justify firing them. Even if they present it as an optional "you 'can' transfer to this role", its not usually considered sufficient as its not much of a choice for most people - lose your job, or get fired for sucking at whatever new role they wanted to mandate. Considering even settling on those involves severance plus damages, its usually cheaper and safer from a PR perspective to just pay severance up front with a layoff, maybe with an internal jobs board offering a "first chance at interviews on the way out" kind of deal. They always have the choice to fire you, have you apply again, and hire you in the new spot, with none of the legal risk to them.
This was more or less what happened to me at my previous job. Half of my team (4 people, including my manager and myself) were Indian women, including my manager, so that's another element of it. Hire an American, set them up to fail, and use that as a justification for further jeetification. I had no training or onboarding period, I was legit just thrown into the deep end and got zero support for anything, which they used as justification to not assign me anything and then shame me for not doing enough. Genuinely such a radicalizing experience.
 
Related:


I echo one of the comments in the video, that the important part of all this, is that we still need people who understand how and why those bugs could be impactful.

A CS major may be able to parse the reports, but it’s WAY easier for those with a security research background to enable preventative measures based on the report.

However,

1778444474415.png
Starting this somewhat crudely, because I want to make the point clear early on - SOMETHING feels wrong right now, specifically with the way that hiring and layoffs keep happening in our industry. I don't care to draw attention to my own personal situation but want to provide some background which will hopefully establish some bonafides.

I got started in IT services doing End-User/Small Business PC diagnosis and repair. I spent approx. 15 years doing various degrees of the IT career ladder (Service Desk, SysAdmin, Network Admin, Systems Engineer, etc.) before finding out how exhausting and soul sucking that was. Having been so tired, I asked around to see what I might be able to take my experience and use it for besides what I was already doing.

The topic of using the skills in cybersecurity was one that came up quite a bit, being recommended to roles in SecOps. This was in roughly 2020/2021. I took the advice and found a place that let me engage in ransomware remediation (more than I had been doing at my level). I was able to keep that one on my resume for a couple years as I was contracting for them on an as needed basis. The work was AWESOME. I operated as the lead for a MSSP startup that was dealing in mostly reactive manners to ongoing ransomware cases. I got to spend 8-14 hours a day digging into how TA's TTP (Threat Tactic Procedures) changes as the event is happening. Working against some of the largest players at the time in the space (BlackBasta, Conti, Lockbit, etc.)

After doing that role for a couple of years, I eventually moved into a more consultant based role where I got to be a bit more proactive (with a healthy bit of reactive mixed in). I got to engage in audits based off of the NIST CSF 2.0 Framework and got to remediate the actions items I found during the audits. I thought that this would surely help me round out my security resume and that if I ever ended up back in the job market I would be better off for it.

To be fair, I wasn't counting on not having a job at any point (then again, who is?) I was fully committed to this company, when one of their customers got hit w/ ransomware because of a decision one of the previous owners had made in creating local accounts on their exploitable firewall that were eventually found and used - I was the one that spent 80 hours over 7 days in that customers office getting things back up (despite the ESXi host being completely encrypted along with the datastores).

But alas, bad things tend to come quarterly when your industry is considered a cost-center for most companies. After taking vacation in Nov '24 out of the country, I came back and was told "We don't have enough work to sustain your bosses salary AND yours, so we are laying you off effective immediately. I was as cordial as possible, returned my equipment, and asked for severance since this was a layoff and not a termination. "We have never done that in the past, so we won't be doing it now."

Obviously, as someone who likes the work I do I immediately shifted gears, tried to find as many companies as I could to apply to with the experience I have. Trying to use the 80-90% required experience rule (if you meet 80-90% apply anyway) that I was always taught growing up and on my way into this field. But it really seems to have gone absolutely nowhere.

It's been 10 months now and I am still looking, very actively at that. I spend hours a day on LinkedIn looking for companies (which is how I found the last 4 roles I had prior to this) to apply to. Even ditching the 80-90% rule in favor for a 100% one. I do OSINT on companies and try to connect and DM hiring managers/recruiters/other employees. Again, adding more time to the already miserable process. I was forced to apply for unemployment, which at this stage has come and went - leaving me with absolutely nothing to bring in income (which I can only imagine based on what I see on LI that several others with similar skills and experience are going through the same).

But when you look at the people that are specifically in charge of that first level of contact? The recruiters? They are too busy making posts on LI about how they "can't be humanly expected to view every candidate that submits an application." Even better is the "Just let AI handle it, it'll tell you which ones are the good ones worth reaching out to" people. Because from what I can see, the ATS doesn't like your resume formatting? Low rank. Doesn't understand the similarities between keywords in your resume/profile and the job description? Low rank. What happens when that does finally get to the recruiters eyes? They call the first 20 in their "top ranking" list and schedule them interviews. Everyone else gets a crappily worded message (if they are lucky) about how the company loves that they put their time in but aren't going to even do them the kindness of talking to them before assuming they don't have what they are looking for.

The hardest part? Now there's all these services that will submit your app for you autonomously, inputting in your data/etc and matching you to whatever keywords you tell it to apply for and basically every AI will write you a resume if you tell it to. So what is really going on? AI is reading the resumes that AI is writing? Nobody is getting work?

There's people with double my time in the field saying they are seeing the same problem. They aren't getting work either. They get completely ignored when 2-3 years ago they were called early into the process and typically saw all of the processes through to the end.

SO back to the point - what the actual heck is going on? (I'd love to be more animated here)
How many times should you edit your LI profile, your resume, your email header, etc. before everyone stops for a second and recognizes something is wrong. Companies like ISC2 ignoring/not validating 5-year requirements and letting SD people that did PW resets in AD for 5 years pass the mark for their minimum requirements, yet somehow are the expected industry norm now?

Honestly, as much as the work makes me feel like a used towel, I'd rather go back to systems engineering making half the money just to avoid these companies that really feel like walking on eggshells. Which makes me super sad, when I talk to others in the industry they say they love the work too. That it brings them enjoyment or at the least fulfillment. But not working for 10 months? No interviews in the last 3? I just don't know anymore if it feels like the place I can keep trying to stay in when there really doesn't feel like much of a foundation to stand in.

TL;DR Cybersecurity job market in the USA feels very shifty, on constantly unsettling sands. Doesn't matter if you have or don't have experience, people all across the sector are saying it feels impossible to get hired or to even get the time of day from recruiters. It feels like something is broken and wrong, and not sure how else to pinpoint the issue other than it feels like a market created by HR/recruiters who don't actually have any knowledge of what we do but disqualify us based on what their ATS tells them (even if frequently wrong).

EDIT: Before anyone else comments here with the same rough advice let me be clear and save you some time. I already reach out to friends/past co-workers extensively when able. No, I do not have a bad relationship with anyone of my recruiters or past co workers just because I respond negatively to your cookie cutter advice. Yes, I do cater my resume to each job I apply to and have done so for at least six out of the ten months I have been in the market. Yes, my experience goes extensively beyond what is listed in the post because I was trying not to bore everyone with my life's story. If you're that interested, look at the comments and I am sure you can put together some of my experience. No, I have not ever had an issue like this in the past 20 years worth of networking and applying to jobs (short of a 5 month window in 2020 after my contract ended for lack of physical work) or in trying to set up business with customers/clients. Lastly, yes I REALLY have been doing this since I was 12 - it's fine if you got to live a privileged upbringing but if I wanted to make enough to eat and have even the smallest amount of required items to go to school and live a decent childhood I had to work for it early on. I don't care if "you read that and immediately thought it was bullshit" nor do I care if you caught one slip I made while writing the original post on TTP (Tactics, techniques, procedures) in the middle of the night. The reality of the amount of ransomware I have stopped, the amount of attacks I have reversed, the amount of companies that wouldn't have been running if not for my help, the amount of courts that have paid me to be an expert witness, frankly - it's enough proof for me. If it's not enough for you, rather than berate me and tell me I am in the wrong industry or that I "need to edit my resume" for the 1000th time, why not instead question others in your own network and ask them if they are going through something similar. Because I would go beyond a shadow of a doubt to say that they'd agree. Everyone I know, 3,5,10,20,25 years of experience is going through this. It's not a matter of us just suddenly forgetting how to make a decent resume or how to communicate with people. To even insinuate that is a fallacy built on your own misconception of the job market. Be it based on your own bias from experience or seeing others. Stop trying to give me unnecessary advice that I didn't ask for and getting upset that I am not reciprocating that. Because things like "Edit Resume, Message your network, surely you are just not doing it right" not only are completely worthless, they're already being done and have been being done for YEARS. They just are not working now, and that is my whole point in this post.
It do be like that.
 
Last edited:
It do be like that.
The important thing is, it’s not just tailoring your resume or LinkedIn, it’s networking. Not just knowing somebody at the company, it’s knowing the right people at the company. Is your connection a software engineer or is it a business unit lead? Or an officer of the company? The latter two are the guys that will cut through the HR BS for you; the first guy isn’t going to be able to help. The pantsuited Karen who sees you’re a white guy, rolls her eyes, and pushes more diverse candidate resumes to the hiring manager. You have to know a nigga who will put his ass on the line for you to push past Pantsuit Karen and get your name over to the hiring manager. To be honest, unless you’re related to those actual players, they’re much less likely to stick their necks out for you, but it can happen.
 
A CS major may be able to parse the reports, but it’s WAY easier for those with a security research background to enable preventative measures based on the report.

However,
TL;DR Cybersecurity job market in the USA feels very shifty, on constantly unsettling sands. Doesn't matter if you have or don't have experience, people all across the sector are saying it feels impossible to get hired or to even get the time of day from recruiters. It feels like something is broken and wrong, and not sure how else to pinpoint the issue other than it feels like a market created by HR/recruiters who don't actually have any knowledge of what we do but disqualify us based on what their ATS tells them (even if frequently wrong).
This has been a growing problem over the last several years. While I'm sure it's an issue across a lot of related fields, Cybersecurity hiring managers are often completely clueless about what they're evaluating you for. I won't rant about it too much, but I went through a four-round interview process with a utility company spread over eight months that completely fizzled without any explanation to either me or the recruiter. This was after I did two different performative tests for them just make it into the final round. I don't think they ended up hiring any of the other candidates either What made it worse is that they kept reaching out to me afterwards for other positions only for the process to stumble in similar ways each time.

The Karens are literally gatekeeping the power grid from being adequately secured.
 
The important thing is, it’s not just tailoring your resume or LinkedIn, it’s networking. Not just knowing somebody at the company, it’s knowing the right people at the company. Is your connection a software engineer or is it a business unit lead? Or an officer of the company? The latter two are the guys that will cut through the HR BS for you; the first guy isn’t going to be able to help. The pantsuited Karen who sees you’re a white guy, rolls her eyes, and pushes more diverse candidate resumes to the hiring manager. You have to know a nigga who will put his ass on the line for you to push past Pantsuit Karen and get your name over to the hiring manager. To be honest, unless you’re related to those actual players, they’re much less likely to stick their necks out for you, but it can happen.
This is key when applying. You have to find a way in which your resume meets the employer directly. You have to bypass HR, particularly the employee relations people or anyone adjacent to it. Mass-applying on LinkedIn or Glassdoor or Indeed or wherever could lend yourself towards being found by headhunters hired by companies who could give you jobs directly, but depending on a multitude of factors (like your occupation or race), you might need to take a different approach. That was my case, and I ended up with a bonus and a job very close to where I live that wasn't even listed publically. All the headhunter had to do was just regurgitate what was on my resume to the manager directly; she didn't have to understand it or add her own personal input. In this case, like you said, connections, particularly PMs or higher-ups. I had to learn this after I got my entry-level job

Simply applying is just going to bundle you in with hundreds of other applications and you'll be quickly rejected, regardless of whether you edited your resume to tailor to their wants or not.

And that speaks to the lack of communication, both on the human resources front and the potential employee's front. This is the result of raising a generation that isn't communicating with each other, and the pandemic, on top of the woke shit, is partial to that.

I can't speak in regards to the tech industry, though, because that's a special kind of fucked, with dumb shit like artificial intelligence reading CVs, ghost jobs, an abundance of software engineers and just the laziness and incompetence of HR. Talking with HR is like hearing chicken scratch. Talking to them made it clear that we were talking from two completely different worlds.

And it sucks. Just imagine going to college and racking mountains of debt up for a job that is null and void in a few years.
 
It looks like an AI story to me and a shaggy dog story at that. What was the significance of leaving the country and coming back to a hostile workplace? I hope he didn't get a job (assuming he's real) because his TDLR was at the end and several compound sentences long. Talk about a break of Netiquette

Rules for discussion groups

Rule 4 has a number of implications for discussion group users. Most discussion group readers are already spending too much time sitting at the computer; their significant others, families, and roommates are drumming their fingers, wondering when to serve dinner, while those network maniacs are catching up on the latest way to housebreak a puppy or cook zucchini.

And many news-reading programs are slow, so just opening a posted note or article can take a while. Then the reader has to wade through all the header information to get to the meat of the message. No one is pleased when it turns out not to be worth the trouble. See "Netiquette for Discussion Groups" on page 65 for detailed rules.

 
Last edited:
I think this is the best advice anyone can give here about getting a job. Imagine a pantsuited karen or an anus lipped thot being the one who gets to decide who is fit to be interviewed for a highly technical role. That’s how it is now at any medium or larger sized company.
This is the true power of networking and making friends in the business. Its not so much about getting positions or opportunities you're not qualified for, its about getting a foot in to have them be able to recognize you are qualified at all. Whenever your business has work events, attend them, comingle with people. Whenever your sector has professional conferences and such, do the same. Make friends, meet people. Don't have to completely suck the linkedin cock and blather out corpotism's, but you need to exist as more than just a resume.
 
1778614156051.png

Ouch.

Also, I've opened a separate thread for it, but it's related.

 
View attachment 8995843

Ouch.

Also, I've opened a separate thread for it, but it's related.

"GM is laying off IT staff to hire IT staff with different skills".

How much do you want to bet one of those skills is living in India (or failing that being an h1b willing to take poverty wages)?
 
Gitlab layoffs next month, "this is not an AI optimization or cost cutting exercise," that is still basically AI reinvestment and flattening management. No exact numbers reported, probably in the hundreds, because they want people to leave "voluntarily" first. They were promoting increasing headcount as recently as last year, and still have 181 roles open right now. Stock now down 10%.

https://about.gitlab.com/blog/gitlab-act-2/
Screenshot 2026-05-12 at 17-24-32 GitLab Act 2.png

We've been working through some significant changes inside GitLab over the past few days, and I want to share them with you directly. The email I sent the team is included below for full context.

The agentic era affords GitLab the largest opportunity in our history as a company, and we're making the structural and strategic decisions to meet it.

This letter has three parts. First, the operational and structural news, which is hard. Second, the strategic thesis we're betting on. And finally, what this means specifically for you, our customers and investors.

This morning we shared with team members that we're beginning a restructuring process at GitLab, and we're running it differently than most. The planning is happening openly, including a voluntary separation window. That creates real uncertainty for our team over the next few weeks, but we believe the outcome will be better for it. Where we can, we plan to finalize the new shape of the company on or before June 1. Where local requirements apply we will not make any changes until the local process is complete.

Four operational changes are part of the workforce reduction.

  1. We're reevaluating our operational footprint, and are planning to reduce the number of countries by up to 30% where we have small teams. We'll continue serving customers in those markets through our partner network.
  2. We're planning to flatten the organization, removing up to three layers of management in some functions so leaders are closer to the work.
  3. We’re re-organizing R&D to create roughly 60 smaller, more empowered teams with end-to-end ownership, nearly doubling the number of independent teams.
  4. We're rewiring internal processes with AI agents, automating the reviews, approvals, and handoffs to speed us up, and plan to right-size roles across the company to follow suit.
Operational changes and the update to our strategy are happening together: they are related but independent. Operationally, we grew into a shape that was right for the last era and isn't right for this one. The strategy below is what we're betting on next, and stands on its own.

We are reaffirming our Q1 and full year FY27 guidance today. The final scope and financial impact of the restructuring will be shared on our June 2 earnings call, once we’ve finished the plan and received approval by our board.

Underpinning the changes we’re making today, and our go forward strategy are 10 core beliefs that span the world we’re building for, the architectural bets we’re making and how we’ll deliver.

We’re evolving our strategy to optimize for the future state of software engineering:

  1. Software will be built by machines, directed by people. AI is the substrate on which future software gets built. Agents will plan, code, review, deploy, and repair. Humans still own the judgment that matters most: architecture, deep understanding of the customer problem, the tradeoffs that require taste. This is why we built and released the Duo Agent Platform in January. Our first quarter adoption is promising, and we're ready to accelerate.
  2. The agentic era multiplies demand for software. Software has been the force multiplier behind nearly every business transformation of the last two decades. The constraint was the cost and time of producing and managing it. That constraint is collapsing. As the cost of producing software collapses, demand for it will expand. Last year, the developer platform market used to be measured in tens of dollars per user per month, this year it is hundreds/user/month and headed to thousands. Not only is the value of software for builders increasing, but we believe there will be more software and builders than ever, and we will serve an increasing volume of both.
  3. The consequential work belongs to engineers. Engineering has always been about more than writing code. Great engineers are problem solvers and builders who care about system design, distributed systems, reasoning through failures, safely integrating new capability into critical systems, and making decisions under ambiguity. These are exactly the skills the agentic era needs more of, especially as the volume of software increases. The supply of deep technical problems is multiplying, and the engineers who can solve them will be among the scarcest and most valuable talent in the market. Our core users’ roles are evolving, their importance is only increasing.
Platforms that weren't built for machine scale are starting to break under it. Winning means investing in the fundamentals that really matter: security, performance, scalability, reliability and user experience. We're making five, fundamental architectural bets. Each one is underway and we plan to deliver without disruption to GitLab customers that depend on us every day.

  1. Machine-scale infrastructure. Agents open merge requests in parallel, trigger pipelines around the clock, and push commits at a rate no human team ever did. Git itself wasn't designed for that load, and bolting AI onto platforms not built for agents is the biggest mistake of this era. We're doing a generational rebuild of the underlying infrastructure to handle agent-rate work as the default. Git itself is being reengineered for machine scale. The monolith is giving way to modern, API-first, composable services. And agent-specific APIs are being built so agents can act as first-class users of the platform, not as bolted-on consumers of human-shaped interfaces. The value of this 100x scale infrastructure, and the reliability and performance it provides is much higher than the generation of infrastructure in the market today.
  2. Orchestration across the full lifecycle. A single agent that writes code or opens a merge request produces activity. Enterprises don't need agent activity. They need running software that moves the business forward. Orchestration is the layer that gets you there. It coordinates agents across the lifecycle, assigning work, managing state, passing context, resolving conflicts, enforcing policy, and keeping a human in the loop when it matters. CI/CD is one of the components getting reimagined. The GitLab pipeline was designed to take human-rate commits and ship them safely; in the agentic era our orchestration service becomes the runtime that coordinates agents, validates the work and enforces guardrails, and drives change all the way to production at machine rate.
  3. Context is our superpower. Every dev tool vendor is converging on similar code generation capabilities. Enterprise AI bills are climbing as fast as adoption. What doesn't commoditize is the unique context the model gets to work with: a data model that connects planning, code, review, security, deployment, and operations across every project and repository, accumulated over years of a team's work. We're investing in that connected data model as a first-class, API-accessible service, and it delivers more value with every human and agent action. Context is what lets agents spend fewer tokens and deliver better results.
  4. Governance built into the core. Governance is what lets enterprises move fast in the agentic era. Like a race car, it doesn't matter how fast you can go if you can't maintain control. As agents take on more of the work, enterprises need a platform that can enforce who's allowed to do what, prove what happened and why, and keep sensitive code and data where it belongs. We're building identity, audit, policy, and deployment flexibility as core platform services that every agent, pipeline, and merge request runs through by default, rather than a separate product layered on top.
  5. One platform, three modes. Trillions of lines of code run the world's businesses today. Rewriting most of it is too risky and too expensive to justify. The cloud era taught us enterprises run hybrid, and operating across that mix has been painful, expensive, and never fully solved. The agentic era will be the same. Every enterprise will live across a spectrum of human-owned, agent-assisted, and agent-autonomous work. We're building one platform, one data model, one governance system that operates across all three modes, and delivering it cloud and model neutral.
  6. A flexible business model. As the way software gets built changes, the business model must evolve with it. Agentic AI can augment teams, perform real work and the business model must scale with the cost and value of the work performed. We're keeping what works: the predictability of subscriptions for what customers have today. We've already added consumption pricing for the work agents do, with other major players following over the past few months. Next, we're introducing more flexibility to mix both as the way of work evolves.
  7. Culture of excellence. Operational character is a key differentiator. What matters most right now is the ability to move quickly, own outcomes, and deliver real value to our customers. Speed with Quality, Ownership Mindset, and Customer Outcomes are our new operating principles, built on a culture of excellence.
For our customers, the most important thing today is what doesn't change. The support, roadmap commitments, contractual terms — all of it continues without disruption. Your account team is available to walk you through today's news if you'd like a conversation.

Where you should expect to see us evolve is in the quality, depth and pace of innovation we ship. We will lead the way in agentic engineering by being customer zero of our platform, demonstrating with our innovation and our results the success you can bet on as our customers. Our vision for the product and business model is clearer than it has ever been and we're accelerating the work. We'll share the next wave of our innovation roadmap at GitLab Transcend on June 10, 2026 and hope you'll join us.

Today's announcement is a deliberate move to lead in a market we believe is in the middle of its largest shift in twenty years. The opportunity here isn't incremental growth on a DevSecOps platform — we're building toward becoming the trusted enterprise platform for software creation in the AI era.

We look forward to sharing an update on the business and our Q1 results in our upcoming earnings call on June 2, 2026. We’ll also share the final scope and financial impact of the restructuring at that time, although we anticipate reinvesting the majority of savings into accelerating our progress against the specific growth and technological initiatives that we've outlined.

This is the most consequential work we've taken on as a company. We'll prove it in the innovation we bring to market, how we serve our customers, and how we create value for our shareholders over the near- and long-term.

Thank you,

Bill Staples CEO, GitLab

A letter to our team.


Today is hard. I want to acknowledge how difficult today is given the volume of change we’re asking you to take in, and the uncertainty of a transparent restructuring process.

We've spent three days together on the why, the what, and the how of where GitLab is going. This letter is the written summary, so you have something to reflect on as we navigate the coming week together.

This restructure process is not like others you may be seeing in the news. Of course AI is changing the way we work and is part of our transformation plan, but this is not an AI optimization or cost cutting exercise. We intend to reinvest the vast majority of savings back into the business to accelerate our unique opportunity in the agentic era as defined in our Act 2 Core Beliefs.

One way our restructure process is different is that we are doing it transparently and including every team member in the process. Starting today, managers across the company are entering deeper conversations with leadership about how the restructuring principles land inside their teams. Those conversations will inform the decision of impacted roles. The reason we're not landing the full decision today is that getting the shape of the next GitLab right matters more than getting it fast — and a transparent process with input from you, your managers, leaders across the organization, and our employee representatives is the best way to land this change with an organization ready to move forward.

As we discussed today, we are planning a workforce reduction driven by a concentration of our country footprint, flattening how we're organized, and role right-sizing designed to optimize the shape and size of our teams. In addition, we’re establishing a new set of operating principles, founded on a culture of excellence.

I want to be direct: I want to do this once, and do it right, and not revisit our structure anytime in the foreseeable future. The team that comes through this restructure is the team that builds Act 2, and you should be able to plan your life and your work without bracing for what comes next. Let’s talk about what’s changing and how we get it right.

Reduced operational footprint: We’re reducing our country footprint because operating in nearly 60 countries
does not allow us to give every team member a great experience. We anticipate reducing the number of countries by 30% focused on geos where we have only a handful of people or fewer. Team members who are in good standing and would like to relocate are welcome to do so. We'll continue to serve customers in those markets through our partner network where appropriate.

Flatter organization: We’re flattening our organization because eight layers is too deep for a company our size and management layers are slowing us down. Every layer of management increases the number of places where priorities and communication gets filtered. A flatter organization will better connect every team member with leadership.

Role right-sizing: As we shift to a new strategy and way of working, powered by AI, we must revisit the size of staffing for each role to ensure we are optimizing for speed and customer outcomes. In some cases, AI can augment and accelerate what team members have been doing, in other places we need to expand certain roles to go faster. We do expect daily use of AI by every individual in the company and we are launching AI acceleration programs to support every role as part of our transformation.

We will be retiring CREDIT as our values framework. CREDIT was the right framework for the very successful Act 1 that took the company to $1B ARR. Those values shaped a company that thrived through COVID and our IPO to become one of the most recognized names in DevSecOps. We are not retiring them because they were wrong, we are choosing instead to focus on something different for this era which demands a different operating posture. Many of the same values we have been living and often talk about are still directly applicable in this era. Our three new operating principles are:

Speed with Quality means we move faster than we have, with the discipline that lets others rely on the work, especially our customers. We achieve this with smaller teams, tighter cycles, and stronger guardrails. We will hold a higher bar for what we commit to and what we deliver against those commitments. Here are some specific examples we shared today of what we expect every team member to embody:


  • We organize and execute cross-functional projects in small teams with more autonomy
  • We set high standards for quality, always prove what we build with customer zero first
  • We build fast, experiment, learn and fail fast, especially for two way decisions
  • If an agent can do it, we automate it, and find things where our judgement or skill is essential
  • We have zero tolerance for unnecessary bureaucracy
  • We use both sync (for speed) and async (for scale) patterns
Ownership Mindset means we expect every individual to act as a steward for the company and with autonomy. The people closest to the work make the decisions about it, and they own the result. Layers of management between leaders and the work coming out, and handoffs that dilute accountability are eliminated. Some examples of the mindset we expect every team member to embody:

  • I take pride in my work because it delivers real outcomes
  • It is never someone else's problem
  • Everyone is on my team
  • I care deeply for the customer and the business health
  • I am efficient with budget, people and everyone’s time
Customer Outcomes means we measure ourselves by what changes for the customer, not by the activity on our side. Internal milestones matter only to the extent that they connect to customer impact. Examples of behaviors we expect from everyone:

  • I can explain how my work connects to a customer outcome, not just a roadmap item or task/activity
  • My work creates joy and delight for customers so they love GitLab
  • I build customer relationships on fairness and mutual respect, and I make sure every deal works for both sides.
  • I’m focused on value realization first because that drives bigger commitments over time
  • When a customer is stuck, I treat their time like it's more expensive than mine
These are built on a culture of excellence, which we expect every team member to uphold. That means:

  • Excellence in thought: team members who are sharp, understand deeply and with precision, communicate with clarity and integrity
  • Excellence in action: people with the ability to produce high quality results and business impact
  • Interpersonal excellence: individuals who are good humans, embrace diversity, inclusion and belonging, assume good intent and treat everyone with respect
Our transparent restructure process creates uncertainty that is real and it's hard, and I'm not going to pretend otherwise. I ask that you reflect on the why, what and how and engage your manager in a real conversation about the work, the questions and concerns you have, and what the next chapter looks like for you. Your manager may not have all the answers, because they too are going through this period of uncertainty. The conversation still matters and your input shapes how we land as a team.

The voluntary window exists for you. After three days walking through Act 2 together, you have the picture you need to decide whether GitLab is the right place for you in the next chapter of your career. If it isn't, talk to your manager or director and, where local requirements allow, apply for a separation before May 18. If approved, we'll include you in the same separation package as anyone else. The approval process exists because individual circumstances and local requirements vary and have to be weighed case by case. This process is meant to provide something we all deserve once the restructure is complete: a team that is excited and committed to the future of GitLab. Please take a moment to listen to what Sid, our founder and Exec Chair, thinks about the changes we’re making today.

I want to spend the rest of this letter convincing you to stay, if the “Why” and the “What” sessions haven’t already convinced you.

Better employee experience. Our overriding objective is to bring a significant improvement to the joy and impact of each team member participating in Act 2. We know that by doing that, we can better capture the creativity and impact of every individual and build a world class business.

Better pay. Once approved, our new bonus program will give every team member who isn’t on an incentive compensation plan or bonus plan today, the opportunity to earn a cash bonus based on their individual performance, targeting 10% of salary, awarded at their manager’s discretion.

Smaller, empowered R&D teams with a clear vision. We aspire to double the number of smaller, R&D teams - up to 60 - with more autonomy and ownership.

Less friction, less overhead. The handoffs that have slowed us down are going to be significantly reduced. The layers between you and the decisions that affect your work are being reduced. If you've ever been frustrated at GitLab by how long it took to get something obvious done, Act 2 is engineered around removing that friction.

Solve big technical problems. Our five architectural bets provide deep, technical problems that will redefine GitLab for the agentic era, including a new git for agents that supports machine scale, an orchestration layer for humans, agents and full lifecycle orchestration, a connected graph of full lifecycle data as a service, brand new policy service to provide centralized governance and a fully autonomous software engineering experience.

More flexible buying programs. Our new consumption buying programs will make it far easier to sell GitLab and for customers to buy GitLab seats + credits and unlock adoption faster than ever before.

Career growth. Bold bets like Act 2 are rare and bring with them opportunities for every team member at every level to learn faster and develop skills and experience that will matter for the rest of your career, here or wherever your path takes you.

Aligned leadership with the will to win. We have a leadership team with e-group, and our SLT, that is committed to win, make the hard decisions and align the organization cross functionally to accelerate results. We will hold ourselves accountable to help you succeed and create a winning organization.

Uniquely positioned to win. We are uniquely positioned to not only participate, but to lead in our category where the TAM is exploding at a step function rate. We have structural advantages in data, technology and customer trust that give us an advantage over AI labs and start-ups that we can harness to redefine how software is built in the agentic era. By being part of Act 2, you will be part of a winning organization that helps shape software engineering in the agentic era.

Whether by choice or otherwise: the work you did here mattered, and it continues to matter. You came to GitLab when it needed you. You built things the next chapter is built on. We owe you real support through the transition, and our genuine respect. If we're asking our team to be world-class, we have a reciprocal obligation to be world-class in how we treat people leaving us. That's the standard we're holding ourselves to.




I'll close with this. None of what I've written makes today easier. It isn't supposed to. What I want you to know is that we've made these decisions carefully, our intention is to make them only once, and we're going to do right by the people leaving and by the people staying.

Thank you for what you've built. Thank you for what comes next.

Bill Staples, CEO, GitLab

Walmart laying off 1,000, possibly more, or forcing them to relocate to California or Arkansas. AI related. Company is incredibly brown, however.

1778638559589.png
https://www.reuters.com/legal/litig...000-corporate-workers-wsj-reports-2026-05-12/
 
Last edited:
...These are exactly the skills the agentic era needs more of, especially as the volume of software increases...
This line particularly stood out to me in GitLab's letter, because to me it shows that the kind of business model they want to pivot to is not quality software, but rather selling by volume (and likely still at a stupid premium) not unlike how Walmart remains profitable. There's already a surfeit of crappy corporate software currently in use and that's before you factor in AI or jeetification, but simply increasing the speed at which these crappy workplace apps get churned out will only end up devaluing GitLab's offerings in the long term.
 
Back
Top Bottom