“Surplus” in disguise

Executives knew about this all along. Throughout the forced reduction at the end of 2022/beginning of 2023. We would have been better off being laid off then. At least we would have had a severance package and been eligible for unemployment. The way it’s sounding, if you decline to move or don’t respond to your letter, you’re “resigning” which makes you ineligible for both. I can’t see how this could possibly be legal for them to do.

I hope to be able to make it abundantly clear to higher ups that I refuse to resign and if they want me to leave, they will need to let me go. Sc--w their legal speak. They aren’t the only ones who can fine legal loopholes.

Also, why does any company in their right mind (which ATT clearly isn’t) think it’s possible for families to just uproot and move? Our spouses have jobs, too. We have family where we live. We have grown deep roots in the communities in which we work and volunteer our time. I severely dislike being discarded on the side of the road like litter someone threw out their car window.

Comment! It's anonymous!

12 replies (most recent on top)

People keep posting about eligibility for unemployment.

Read your state's law. In my state, it clearly says if a company expects you to travel an unreasonable distance to a new job location (defined as more than 90 minutes,) doesn't offer to cover the additional expenses, and you decline, then you are eligible for unemployment and are not considered to have voluntarily quit. It is in black and white and there are years of case law to back it up.

If you make the move rent a place because your job has a good chance of being eliminated within a year or two. T has done it before. It is a way to cull the herd. It probably will go down to who you know and who you snow. Like it has been in the past. Just like Stink has said in the past: “No job is safe”.

People move all the time. Deal with it.

It has never and will never be up to the company alone to determine if you get unemployment.

If one refuses a move to a hub and is laid off, the AT&T severance policy applies. What one gets is dependent upon how long the person has worked for the company.

It’s in writing so no need to hyperventilate.

it seems that there are Lots of new people work for T :((((
Re-Org relocation has been part of the standard for the past 15 years.

This is nothing more or less than mimicking Elon Musk but having the “great” idea to use it solely as a guise for layoffs. Nothing more, nothing less. This wasn’t some long thought out brilliant idea. Copycat move to solely reduce headcount. Can’t be the bad guy if everyone is doing it.

Regarding severance and relo policies. Trolls don't have access to HROS, so they can't know the policies, instead they make it up to incite fear, uncertainty and doubt. The more nastier the responses they get, the more they like it. Same goes for those 'supposed' employees who are going to disconnect their AT&T cell phone service and move to Cricket (if only they knew!).

You get a severance package if you are asked to move more than 50 miles. Get educated and stop spreading bs

The way it’s sounding, if you decline to move or don’t respond to your letter, you’re “resigning” which makes you ineligible for both. I can’t see how this could possibly be legal for them to do.

Simply not true. Stop listening to people and get familiar with the FAQ, etc and start asking questions now, before the made rush, so you can make an Informed decision.

Move on with your life.

Hire a lawyer. Seriously.

Thread regarding AT&T layoffs

“Surplus” in disguise

12 replies (most recent on top)

Post a reply