Want to bet that there was a round of human review applied after the algorithm ran where, at a minimum, employees judged to be high-performing (or otherwise favored) were saved even though they were initially flagged by the AI/data analysis?
I believe the implication there was that low-performers favored by upper management (for reasons like nepotism) were kept as opposed to productive employees whose performance is not reflected in "tick the box" KPIs.
I'd bet your right. This is close to a termination for cause. If someone fired my reports for cause (rather than a we need to lower burn layoff) without my signoff, I'd be right out the door with them.
