Support or is the decision more often based strictly on job title or role classification?
18 replies (most recent on top)
Nope. Even small teams where everyone pulls their weight and helps others have cuts made. There was no dead weight on our team. They got rid of the oldest people. Next time around they got rid of the one person not in Texas.
And, yes, the team is now swamped. And, yes, there are things now not getting done.
I do about 15 minutes worth of actual work per day.
- PIPi Longnapping
If your salary is on the higher end of the national average, you're out.
No - they kept the id--ts on my team who were in core or specialty and two of them I know were on PIPs.
Doing that kind of evaluation would require thinking, which doesn’t exist at this company
Overpaid - GONE
Slacker - GONE
No RTO- GONE
Old- GONE
Brown Noser - STAY
Indian - STAY
Nothing to save remote team mates... productivity is not considered.
It has to factor somewhat. Here's the scenario I experienced:
100% remote, right about MRP for my position, maybe a little below. Was given the, "you may be impacted speech" then three others were let go.
One was remote, younger than most of our team, did some projects, and barely did the day to day work unless we were really busy.
Two were workaholics, older than me, one by a few years, one near retirement age. The younger was our administrative queen who gamed the day to day work to look busy without actually adding much value. The other worked themselves like a dog in the trenches and was a joy to work with 80% of the time. Covered one of the busiest shifts. We all missed that one. They both occasionally made mistakes but nothing major.
I was kept, did no projects, did what was required of the day to day work, covered out busiest hours and had the highest numbers of our main role and quantifiable work. I made maybe one mistake a year but it never impacted anyone else on our team.
There's your layoff logic from this tiny conclave of IT. I used past tense since I've since been moved to a new group/team.
It is an algorithm. It is a combination of factors like age, location, education and salary.
Ok
I've known several managers who were completely blindsided by the displacement of their high-caliber employees...you know the type...the ones who get sh!t done.
really depends. for efficiency related layoffs some manager may be asked to supply a few names in which case they could throw in their under performers. For location strategy based it is more HR driven but in cases where relocation may be offered, that decision is based on evaluation of role and employee.
Most certainly not. I've seen individual contributors and managers who have shaped the whole department being laid off like they were nothing.
With this generation of layoffs as it pertains to local, a solid no. We've lost highly productive and valuable people who's only problem is where they live. One guy worked with the bank 10+ years from the same location.
No. Direct Manager probably ranks their employees, determines who is more critical than others. But displacement decisions largely subjective unless it’s displacement due to Remote status. Manager’s manager also has say in who to keep/save and who should be first, second, third to be displaced. Exec leadership can override lower management decisions, but direct and second line managers are the ones to provide initial “cut” list when demanded by upper management. There is no assessment of “employee” value based on skills or industry experience; largely subjective. I’ve seen really good contributors (managers and IC) displaced and marginal skill folks saved because they were su-k ups and made the manager feel good.
Past contributions are definitely looked at. If the person performed well in the past, then the likelihood of performing good in the future is high.
Also, physical health etc, gray hair is a factor.
Stay fit, just for men
No.
You would think a company like Wells would have processes in place, but it’s simply asking the managers for a list of who to lay off next. Nothing else will save you.