I've now experienced both types of layoffs. I've been brought in a room and told the site is closing in 90 days and now this. They both stink. If the company chooses to operate differently and layoff people it's with in their right. I think there is no good way to do it.
However, these would have made it more bearable for myself:
- I would say it could have been done swifter. People should have been told with in 2 week a of that initial announcement. This waiting game is not only having negative effects on individuals, but the productivity is out the window.
- It should have been delayed until after the pandemic if it could have been afforded.
- They could have held off on the stock but back if they knew they would be laying off 1000's
- They should have done the layoffs before the announcement of a $4bil purchase with 9000 new bodies. That's a pretty big slap in the face to the people that built ALL and are facing elimination.
- They could have started with a voluntary early retirement program to allow those that wanted to leave to do so and re-access their staffing and need for RIFS.
Lastly, I believe the leaders should not have implied there would not be layoffs, knowing full well of this plan, on the town hall early on in the pandemic. That is not transparent.
Originally posted by @iow+165Ddjv8.