Laid Off: Google's Creative Director of Multicultural Audiences
"You've been seeing a lot of companies that five years ago were embracing DEI efforts and 'committed' to the cause, suddenly ending support for these programs."
Laid Off is the coolest place on the internet to talk about being laid off. Wanna partner? Have a tip? Hit reply.
Paid subscribers get access to:
The Laid Off Discord 💬
Laid Off Trend Reports 📈
The Pen Pals program 📫
…and the warm fuzzies for supporting independent media 💖
This is a reader-supported publication and I appreciate you.
In today’s issue, I talk to Silvia Rodriguez, a former creative director at Google who focused on multicultural audiences. We talk about the wave of companies distancing themselves from DEI efforts and what it’s like seeing your former CEO at Trump’s inauguration.
Silvia Rodriguez, 34, headed creative strategy at Google for top YouTube clients with a focus on multicultural audiences. She drove a $2.7 million incremental investment attributed to Hispanic audience work in 2023 alone.
In January of 2024, she was laid off along with 15 others from her 60-person team as part of a company restructuring. She had worked there for two years.
“It’s really unfortunate to see teams emphasize multicultural and DEI efforts and then the second a cut needs to be made, those are the first to go,” Silvia said.
She adds that tech CEOs opposing and dismantling their diversity programs in favor of merit-based hiring are misguided.
“DEI programs don't preference under-qualified people. They help put all well-qualified people on an even footing — regardless of race, sexual preference or identity, socio-economic backgrounds, etc. It's the ultimate merit-based way of hiring.”
How did they handle layoffs?
They started putting 10 minute meetings on people’s calendars. Some were in person, some were via video. They read off a script and the whole thing lasted about five minutes total.
Did you see them coming?
Yes because the company let us know a round of layoffs was coming. And as a person working for a DEI team, I know those are the first to go.
Can you elaborate on that?
I think overall there's a perception that teams focused on DEI and multicultural efforts — whether that is internal comms or external business — are less critical to the business than the "core" operations. Often this starts from the top. If you hire these teams because it was the fad of the moment or because politically it was what everyone was doing without any actual plan as to why or how these teams are essential and a good business move, then they'll always be struggling to make a case for themselves which leads to the perception that they aren't necessary.
Our team was only two years old, with only three people, and there was still a lot of internal education happening on what we did, why it was important to the broader business goals, and this overall idea that "anyone should be able to do multicultural-focused work." So when we heard layoffs where going to happen, I knew we would likely be the target. Look at the current US government, the first teams to go are DEI teams.
You also said that it's even tougher to get back on your feet post-layoff since DEI has been your niche focus. Have you noticed any changes in the landscape over the last year? The last few weeks?
Totally. I have been working on multicultural / Hispanic audience-focused work for basically my entire career, a little over a decade. It's always up and down, there's years where it's booming and there's tons of jobs, but unfortunately it is very much led by the overall politics of the time and right now, the politics aren't swinging in the favor of DEI. You've been seeing a lot of companies that five years ago were embracing DEI efforts and "committed" to the cause, suddenly ending support for these programs. Which means there's way more professionals in this niche competing for the same few jobs.
Google CEO Sundar Pichai attended Trump's inauguration. Trump has been actively dismantling and disrupting DEI efforts at the federal level. In response, companies have started to distance themselves from DEI practices. What is it like to see the head of the company you worked for — specifically on DEI efforts — among those flanking Trump just a year after laying you off?
It's not surprising. Just a few weeks after getting laid off, this article from the BBC started making it's way around LinkedIn. The headline was "How Google is sticking to - and soaring past - its DEI goals." Yet the sales team had just essentially eliminated its multicultural team. I think at the time it was all still fresh so I was pretty upset by it, it all felt so fake. The company gets a pat in the back but I don't have a job? But now it's just like, yeah the pendulum has swung the other way so the CEOs will follow.
I think what I've learned from this is that these big corporations are just following trends. In the wake of 2020, it was very profitable and well perceived to focus on this sector [DEI] and so everyone started hiring, setting these ambitious goals, and benefiting from all the positive PR. But ultimately, it's rarely coming from an actual place of "this is good for business long term." Never mind the actual importance of DEI, which is to hold corporations accountable and actually level out the playing field. If you only consider the business side to it, more than half of Gen Z is multiracial. The US census predicts that by 2045 the US will become a majority-minority nation. The workforce should reflect this, and the people that have experience in this "category" are essential to future growth.
Speaking of tech CEOs, Mark Zuckerberg recently wrote an internal memo stating that Meta planned to lay off the "lowest performers." It speaks to the larger discourse toward "merit-based" hiring. Curious if you have any strong feelings about this.
There's clearly a confusion among opposers of diversity programs as to what they are actually intended to do. DEI programs don't preference under-qualified people. They help put all well-qualified people on an even footing — regardless of race, sexual preference or identity, socio-economic backgrounds, etc. It's the ultimate merit-based way of hiring.
This whole "lowest performers" is also such BS — it doesn't take into account, for example, if the teams or individuals were low performing because of lack of resources or support from the organization. The market is so saturated and so, so tough, people are going full years without getting work, losing their homes, having to move. To also add this label of "lowest performer" is just heartless. Companies like Meta should take responsibility for layoffs. If anything, it shows how poorly they planned and projected growth.
What would you say to companies now distancing themselves from DEI efforts right now? To those that are standing their ground?
I don't know that I have anything to say to companies that are ending their DEI efforts. I would maybe ask "why?" I know why, I know it has to do with the political climate, but if it was so important in 2020, why did it suddenly become unimportant? I'd love for them to admit that it was never a conscious effort to move forward, that it was just a trend. But in the end I would just tell everyone to take note, to not forget. When the tides change again and hiring picks up, think about what organizations will actually support those teams intentionally. As a professional in this field, that will be really important for me, knowing that if I'm joining a multicultural-focused team, that the company fully understands the need for such a group internally and intends to support it with time and resources. To those companies staying their ground, good for them. That means DEI efforts were a well-thought out moral and business strategy. I'll remember those as well.
Is that something you now look for when applying to jobs, whether a company has stuck to their commitment to DEI efforts?
Honestly, it's a tough balance I'm trying to strike because on the one hand, its very hard to have moral support for these organizations. But on the other, I haven't had a full-time job with benefits in over a year and I know so many people in the same boat. So while I know how I feel about these companies, I also understand the importance of job security. I think I'm definitely more cautious now about the types of roles and the company policies. I ask a lot more questions about resources and how the organization supports specific teams. I ask about the impact of the political climate — for example, I recently interviewed at a non-profit in the education space and straight up asked how the current political efforts to reform education and the education department would affect the organization. I think before I would have never thought to ask those types of questions.
You said that since the layoff, you care less about working for a "prestigious" company. Do you think they're overhyped?
I think they are overhyped for a reason. The perks are really great and so is the salary. And even more so, it does feel rewarding to say you work for a really well-known company. I'm a first generation immigrant, my family moved from Venezuela to the US when I was eight-years-old. When I took my parents to the Google office for the first time, their minds were blown. And that gave me such a feeling of accomplishment, like that's the American dream, you know? You move to a different country without speaking the language, and 25 years later your daughter gets to work for the biggest tech company in the world.
But now I think I value other things more. Job security and what that means for your peace of mind, for one. I think you can do really amazing projects that you're super proud of in any organization, so long as you have the right resources and support. And I think just overall, putting less value on my job — where I work, what my title is, etc. — and more on who I am as a person. How do I help my community, how do I make an impact? It's so dumb, but a few years ago I realized that my social media bio said "Silvia Rodriguez, Creative Director @ company" and I was like, "is that it? That's the first thing I want someone outside of my work community to know me by?" So I think it's been this slow, conscious effort on my part to distance the Silvia work person from Silvia the everything else person, and the layoff really fast-tracked that effort.
You have a group chat with your former colleagues you were laid off with. What kind of stuff did you talk about in that chat right after layoffs? Is it still active?
At the beginning, it was a lot of sharing key information. There were about 15 of us total that were laid off from the larger team and communication was not super clear — when were we getting paid until, how severance worked, etc. And a little of bit of shit-talking, like blowing off steam. We were the only ones that knew what we were going through at the time, so it was good to see and hear all the range of emotions in real-time. The larger chat isn't really active much these days, it's been over a year so people not only moved on, I imagine they needed to move on. You can't keep talking about the layoff forever. But I have stayed in touch with a lot of people from that group, we catch up every once in a while. Particularly the other people on the Multicultural & DEI team, they have been a really great support group even in the job hunt.
Silvia is a bilingual creative looking for creative director / ACD, creative lead, and senior-level copywriter full-time roles. Her expertise is in building authentic brand campaigns for the multicultural / US Hispanic audience. You can reach her on LinkedIn.
Such a great read and such an important topic of conversation! Thanks to Silvia for sharing her insight and pov.