Thread regarding AT&T layoffs

Why RTO mandates are layoffs in disguise

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/12/why-rto-mandates-are-layoffs-in-disguise-according-to-workplace-experts.html

The return-to-office debate sees no end in sight as companies grapple with mandates and the employee backlash that follows.

While a whopping 90% of companies plan to implement return-to-office policies by the end of 2024, flexibility remains a top priority for employees — and the lack of it might push them to seek other opportunities.

However, that is exactly what some companies want, according to workplace experts that CNBC Make It spoke to.

"Companies would never come out and say it because of legal implications," said Dan Schawbel, managing partner at Workplace Intelligence and New York Times bestselling author.

"A company might use a return to office mandate as an opportunity to restructure its workforce."

Schawbel added that one company that could be employing this "covert layoff" tactic is AT&T, which recently mandated that 60,000 managers across 50 states work in person — but only at offices in just nine locations.

An AT&T employee told Bloomberg in a June report that the telecommunications company's new return-to-office mandate was "a layoff wolf" in sheep's clothing.

AT&T did not respond to CNBC Make It's requests for comment.

RTO is a cheap and dirty way for companies to avoid legal complications and financial obligations associated with layoffs.
Laurie Ruettimann
CAREER ADVISOR

Over the past few months, companies like Google have announced tighter in-office rules, including badge tracking and noted attendance in performance reviews.

Other companies like Amazon, Disney and Starbucks have also enacted strict RTO mandates.

Making work 'unappealing'
The need to induce soft layoffs through RTO mandates could be driven by economic threats, recession fears and changes related to consumer spending, workplace experts told CNBC Make It.

"Some companies have been saddled with very pricey real estate as their workforce and often their customers go remote and digital. Companies need to drop some weight any way they can," said Meghan Biro, a talent management and workplace expert.

This "soft layoff" tactic isn't new, said Schawbel, and it doesn't just come in the form of RTO mandates. Here are other ways companies can induce layoffs:

  1. Slowing down or halting the hiring process

Allowing natural attrition (employees leaving due to resignations, retirements, or other reasons) to gradually reduce the workforce over time without actively firing employees.

  1. Offering voluntary buyouts or early retirement packages to employees

This encourages employees to leave the company on their own terms, while allowing the company to reduce headcount without resorting to involuntary layoffs.

  1. Reducing work hours or implementing temporary furlough

This means employees work fewer hours or take unpaid leave for a specific period, helping the company save costs while retaining the workforce.

The goal was to target the quiet quitters and those with opportunities elsewhere by making the current work environment unappealing.
Laurie Ruettimann
CAREER ADVISOR

Career advisor and workplace expert Laurie Ruettimann agreed, saying that she had to employ the same "soft layoff" tactics in 2001.

"[We were] restructuring reporting responsibilities to make workers less comfortable, or subtly increasing workload or duties for people exempt from overtime," she added.

"The goal was to target the quiet quitters and those with opportunities elsewhere by making the current work environment unappealing."

In the same way, RTO mandates can be especially cumbersome — by removing perks such as flexibility, being able to care for others at home as well as saving time and money on commuting.

"Rolling back those gains, such as remote work and flexible hours, is audacious, but companies are daring employees to quit," Ruettimann added.

Amazon, for example, doubled down on its RTO policy by demanding some staffers move to a central hub. This prompted some employees to leave instead of uprooting their families or breaking their leases.

A RTO mandate also presents an opportunity for some companies to eliminate staff by evaluating individual performance under new circumstances, said Schawbel.

"Employees who are deemed to be less productive or adaptable during this phase could potentially be targeted for layoffs," he added.

"If a company decides that certain roles must be performed in the office, they might lay off remote workers and then initiate a new hiring process to fill those roles with employees willing to work in the office."

Why it works for companies — or not
Why wouldn't companies call a spade a spade? It could be due to a multitude of reasons, but experts told CNBC Make It it ultimately "comes down to money."

"RTO is a cheap and dirty way for companies to avoid legal complications and financial obligations associated with layoffs," said Ruettimann.

Some of these obligations include severance packages and unemployment insurance, which companies don't have to provide if employees decide to leave on their own.

By associating the layoffs with a broader workplace strategy, the company can direct the narrative and manage the way the information is perceived by both employees and the public, said Schawbel.

It's assumed those unwilling to return to the office may not be as invested in the company's future, making them more likely to leave voluntarily.
"Announcing direct layoffs can lead to a drop in morale among remaining employees, which could affect productivity and overall workplace atmosphere," he added.

"By framing the layoffs as part of a larger strategy, the company might attempt to minimize the negative impact on morale. It can also lead to less speculation about the company's financial health and stability."

Many leaders and HR professionals believe they can gauge the commitment level of their employees by counting heads and tallying up who comes back to the office, said Ruettimann.

"It's assumed those unwilling to return to the office may not be as invested in the company's future, making them more likely to leave voluntarily," she added.

"But that process is flawed … Many who remain [may not be more invested but] are scared or lack the opportunity to leave."

Soft layoffs can also backfire by overworking the remaining employees, leading to burnout and reduced productivity.

"Implementing a mandatory RTO policy without considering employees' well-being and work-life balance can negatively impact morale and overall engagement," said Schawbel.

"Employees who feel their needs aren't being considered might become disengaged, which could lead to decreased productivity and innovation."

Over time, skilled and valuable employees will choose to leave rather than comply with a mandate that doesn't align with their work preferences.

"I think some companies are using the [RTO] tactic as a way to show they have strength of conviction despite what their employees might prefer," Biro added.

"But employees are tired of being jacked around by managers and leaders. Many seeking career advice from me prefer to bet on themselves and leave rather than return to an office rooted in an unhealthy power dynamic."

by
| 2103 views | | 17 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1oAmQktz

17 replies (most recent on top)

RTO is doable and we can get thru COVID but what scares me is working side by side with these insanely over political posters on here! Pure insanity. Lord help us! they eat, sleep, sht, think and dream of the “left and right” all day and have no life or worth beyond it. that’s fuking scary!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1dzt+1oAmQktz

"If the RTO involves working at an office that one wasn't working at before the pandemic, it is more layoff than RTO. "

I mean that is exactly what's happening. Grouping by orgs for no reason other than to make life he-l. Perfectly good office 15m from house but now I gotta drive an hour.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1nyg+1oAmQktz

"And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the perfect example why we're all f... I mean doomed. People like this poster exist. They work side by side with us. They vote. And they truly believe they're justified, and they're on the side of the good, fighting vs evil. Perfect example."

And they know how to clear their cookies and/or upvote their own posts many times.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @sik+1oAmQktz

If the RTO involves working at an office that one wasn't working at before the pandemic, it is more layoff than RTO. As far as unemployment, a relocation requirement would be good cause attributable to the employer insofar as collecting UI is concerned.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rhw+1oAmQktz

straight up Age Discrimination as "John" the pompus as hole stated

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fvd+1oAmQktz

This article just illustrates one of the most basic rules of American business and if you don’t believe it you are an id--t

Most (not all) companies will do whatever they think they can get away with no matter the negative impact to customers, employees and the community at large if what they are doing may help the bottom line,

If using RTO as a way to cover for layoffs helps with perception a la AT&T so be it. If you can run trains with tons of safety defects and get away with it a la Union Pacific so be it.

I have seen the sausage being made on this. A number of years ago I had a CMO who is now a CEO who could not stand that we had to 8 point type for legal disclaimers in printed materials per the FTC (I believe). He always freaked about how much legal there was and insisted that we make the legal 6 pt even though that is virtually unreadable. He figured we could probably get away with it so sc--w legal.

Same with the way companies add nonsense fees to customer bills to obscure price hikes or how awful Amazon treats warehouse workers. They can get away with it so they do it.

This isn’t anything new but sometimes it needs to be reiterated like in the article.

Execs cannot stand it when employees have a little leverage. That’s why despite their problems I do support unions. It’s one of the very few small ways to check some of this.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hwf+1oAmQktz

The RTO for employees that won’t be here in the next few months to a year is the biggest crock of sh-t. It’s also a crock of sh-t for employees that had a nearby office but now have a 100 mile commute. Everybody else should just their trap.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @pwm+1oAmQktz
Time to RTO and actually work.
Did you actually read the article posted or are you trolling on auto pilot?

Stankey's bu-t sniffing HR lackeys all have reading comp issues - you see it in all their posts.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dmf+1oAmQktz

Its simple, if you don't like the rules of business then quit. If business wants you back in office, you have a choice. Quit crying and copy pasting articles.

Ok man, I think you're either not a real human, or just slow. We're not even talking about it here. Yes, it's related, but the point is it's NOT about rules or RTO, it's about them trying to act like victims who are so worried about this tough economy, that they have to lay off lots of people, and have to ba--s to actually call it what it is, and play these stupid games, so the good little trolls like you can continue to try to gaslight people by posting nonsense like you just did.

Maybe you should stop trolling, get back to your truck after your 15th bathroom break this morning, thank your useless union, and get back to work now? Great.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ggx+1oAmQktz

Its simple, if you don't like the rules of business then quit. If business wants you back in office, you have a choice. Quit crying and copy pasting articles.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ize+1oAmQktz

OP here. I don't want this to get political, but I guess everything is these days. I don't know how deep it all goes and who should be blamed for what. Personally, I just blame these huge greedy corporations. They have unreal amounts of money, Alphabet for example, they can probably sustain all of their employees and keep going for a hundred years even if they made 0 profit, but for them, a few cents in stock value means so much more than lives of people that helped build it, this is the sad reality. When the hard times hit, and people struggle (although idk how much Google employees actually struggle, but they've earned it), their answer is, let's sc--w people over even more, let's lay them off when it's the hardest to actually get a new job, that's how we reward them for decades of hard work!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @vsq+1oAmQktz

Time to RTO and actually work.

Did you actually read the article posted or are you trolling on auto pilot?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @afn+1oAmQktz

Very well captured.

It is definitely not about collaboration.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cba+1oAmQktz

Water is wet. No sh-t sherlock

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ysf+1oAmQktz

If you no longer want to work, leave. It’s actually a simple choice.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dqp+1oAmQktz

Time to RTO and actually work.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jhj+1oAmQktz

**Comments by the poster.

I think it's especially sickening, seeing how some of the largest and most successful companies, like Google, Amazon, Meta... AT&T (this one is questionable) are doing this because of "fears of looming recession"... So their answer is to throw people, who have been loyal to them for many years, in many cases dozens, out, into a crazy job market filled with, at this point no doubt, hundreds of thousands or others just like them, to try to survive somehow on their own. All their billions, and for some trillions of dollars in the bank is just not enough to try to help their people get through these tough times together. They only worry about their hedge funds investors and CEOs salaries. It's tempting to try to ensure to not give them any business, ever, but what are people gonna do when it's 90+% of all businesses? And they know it. Greedy ba----ds. That's all I can say. **

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qnz+1oAmQktz

Post a reply

: