First round buy out package is flat 2 months if pay. No time of service adjustment. Very shocking. This is HR. Other groups may vary but probably not much. For sure much worse than ACT packages.
23 replies (most recent on top)
They give you 2 months to find a job then exit date. Post exit date you get one week per year of service.
@PMYkmc6-2iux yes that is what most reported and cooked performance (which translates to how much manager subjectively likes you as it is done outside process as open season to shoot who you don't like) to make it silent and avoid reporting (someone calculated max 1500 with legal unreported) while still trying to hit 10% per year which means a gap of 8.5-10K yanked
Is it 2 months to find another job or two months pay for immediate exit?
This is class action lawsuit begging to happen!
So far, proven data points are:
-
process collusion and misconducts by management: hiding information from the employee about made up reasons for the cut never informing in written or often even no precise verbal form of any reason nor any way to confront any of the made up rationale as this gives sign of open hunting season to all managers to have license to kill any employee they do not like without any consequences back to them
-
HR misconducts: no any written nor any level of meaningful detailed information given and instead there is what seems to be game scenario to probe employee giving just few figures and scare tactics
Overall, there seems to be planned action based on bullying, misconducts and collusion tactics to avoid fair paying and legal reporting. Intel HR and management are colluding to misrepresent all these layoffs as hidden performance based, which is not only illegal, but insulting above all.
It all strongly smells as quite easy class action lawsuit, which speaks to huge growing in-competencies across Intel including HR and management as prime example here.
I suggest all affected to:
-
contact lawyers and start consultations
-
share information here about details of misconducts, good legal resources and lawyers in OR,CA,AZ
@PMYkmc6-1gbm agree with both parts unfortunately most good employees left by themselves although some here in US, like in OR, are affected by upper shady method. Lots of other good employees are hair trigger away from jumping out and the way Intel handles or mishandles situations like this shall define the outcome.
@PMYkmc6-bkc even US employment laws in OR, CA and AZ can protect employees and if we spread this information widely on the internet the negative PR together with legal actions and potential class action lawsuit can change Intel behavior
@PMYkmc6-1ccf yes last ACT had better packages mainly because Intel did not have dirty Bob the punishment figure and was not that deep in trouble as it is now, so I guess it will just get worse
Actually, employment laws in Germany did protect employees. There are still some people around who got ISPs during ACT and who flat out refused to leave.
The crazy part: Those ISP people were actually deadwood, and it would have helped to get rid of them. Instead, a lot of the good people left voluntarily who had a chance outside of the company and who didn‘t want to stay in the toxic environment that ACT and the broken Focal process had created.
Works councils will protect us again, ja!
Lots of people will be wishing they took the package last year!
GPTW is just better and better, what great leaders
Employment laws in Europe are much weaker than people think. If a whole site is closed, then there is nothing you can do. Works councils in Europe are toothless tigers who during „good times“ complain pointlessly about issues that are irrelevant for most employees but who suddenly disappear when things get tough.
Employment laws in Europe protect against that ruthlessness; I hope
Says the person who got the 30% raise
“ why do I have to pay anyone to leave”
GPTW
Is the iCDG package mentioned in the US or Europe. Surprised if a European package would be that low
Bit of a kick in the face.
iCDG also two months of pay. 12 years of service here (including previous companies pre-acquisition). Focking bummer.
Finance is 1 week per year of service. Exit date end of jan 2018 to protect close.
For those that think "This is HR." meant someone in HR posted that.. your cognitive skills are declining.
Read the next sentence... "This is HR. Other groups may vary..." If they are saying "other groups may vary" AFTER saying "This is HR".... since NO OTHER GROUP WAS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED they were speaking ABOUT HR's layoffs. Granted, for more clarity they should have said "This is FOR HR" and it would have been more clear for some.
And no, I'm not HR... just someone pointing out the obvious to the oblivious.
They won’t advertise this in any announcement given the great postive response from the company from ACT from he who says “why do I have to pay them to leave”. Will just kick you to the door to save himself and protect his 30% raises.
I am only hearing this second hand, but my friend who works in SMG has been told something similar. He has not seen the formal notification email/letter yet, but 2 months pay is what he has been told to expect from his manager. He is already looking outside now for new employment.
"This is HR". LOL.
@fsc Why exactly would that be a troll? You think HR people don‘t get layed off?
New reality under new CFO.
Not really decided by CEO.
@fsc - Maybe, but I don't think they will offer any better packages. Even for stealth layoffs ("redeployments") this year they had been giving only 2 months notice to find another job or GTFO.
"This is HR" means it is a troll.
“Why do I need to pay people to Leave”