In my experience it almost never works like this. The fish rots from the head.
I've found bad managers are able to exist, even thrive, due to a culture of loyalty. Having worked in several countries this is a very Corporate America thing (IME). Loyalty is the only trait that matters. Fealty might be a more accurate description.
So that bad manager's manager looks at a situation where people are leaving. Those people are disloyal and thus bad. The bad manager is completely loyal and thus good.
This is true. I suffered a lot until I learned that showing loyalty is necessary for having a career in a big company.
Most people don't care at all about doing a good job. They just want more money. To get along with them, you must help them get more money. If you oppose them on anything, they will make you suffer. And if they have the skills, they will manipulate and gaslight you. You can't make anyone do their work well. People work well when the organization is set up for it. If you can't tolerate your teammates' behavior, just move to a different team or company.
TFA mentions a PIP quota and implies that OP was used to fill the quota, so I'm pretty sure upper management won't blink at this happening. They expect people to get PIP'd, and they have no visibility on the actual internals, so to them OP is just as good as anybody else who got PIP'd.
The upper management only gives a blink when it becomes more known by the public. They don't want to hear (just not to be in the responsibility zone) and when it's widely known they would go whitewashing or PR stunts.
Why they had to invent "to be the best employer of the world" as a leadership principle?
The more people should stand up and make the stupid policies known, that's the only way this can stop. Otherwise this policies will be the norm for many companies since "it can work"
Upper mgmt generally doesn't give a shit about what the public knows. Amazon is famous for employees pissing in bottles because they don't get enough breaks. No one cares enough to make the warehouse conditions humane. They just do enough PR to feel good about it. The job still sucks, and the pay still sucks.
The only thing that management cares about is how much they're paid, and how much power they have. Look at how Elon Musk behaves. He gets mad/irritated when told by regulators that he can't exercise the power he feels is his right. I actually don't think he gives a hoot about how much money he has, except as a tool for accomplishing what he wants.
Others are more into the wallet than the ego. Do you think Zuckerberg gives a crap about what privacy advocates think? Most people have a fair idea of how far FB spies on them, and Zuck knows they don't care as long as they can share cat pictures with their friends, or post Let's Go Brandon stuff. But you can bet that he's supremely pissed about losing so much money due to Apple's privacy changes.
It’s difficult to not feel empathy for people you have a relationship with. Even if a manager is incompetent, they will get the benefit of the doubt from vs a lowly engineer whom the Senior Manager does not have a personal relationship with.
There are very few Senior Managers who take the time to look beyond what’s immediately presented to them.
So M2s+ are expected to have empathy for M1s, but M1s are not expected to have empathy for engineers. And, M2s+ having been M1s prior to being promoted, have to develop empathy when becoming M2s+.
Have I described correctly the situation?
Legend:
M2 - senior management, has other managers reporting to them
M1 - first layer of management, has workers / engineers as direct reports
I think both are expected to have empathy. It goes south when one of them doesn’t have empathy for their -1 because they get the benefit of the doubt from their +1 in general.
I've found bad managers are able to exist, even thrive, due to a culture of loyalty. Having worked in several countries this is a very Corporate America thing (IME). Loyalty is the only trait that matters. Fealty might be a more accurate description.
So that bad manager's manager looks at a situation where people are leaving. Those people are disloyal and thus bad. The bad manager is completely loyal and thus good.
Seriously.