Thread regarding Enbridge Inc. layoffs

Forcing us to quit

It feels to me like Enbridge is intentionally fostering a nearly unbearable work environment for us to make us quit on our own. It's like they want to cut a certain number of people but don't want to pay severance if they can avoid it.

I could just be paranoid about this, but situation has become so toxic at my location and managers are doing nothing to help improve it - on the contrary - that I can't help but think it's intentional.

by
| 3187 views | |
Post ID: @OP+Yadh2kM

11 replies (most recent on top)

Anyone been bullied, harassed, and seen acts of intimidation from leaders?

by
|
Post ID: @gcvy+Yadh2kM

Consensus?

by
|
Post ID: @2bmk+Yadh2kM

So the consensus seems to be that the leadership from on high tells mid-level management and front line leaders, "Do your job in a weird way that puts delays and inefficiency in the way of progress. Then engineer the work environment as to create toxicity that can't be traced back to anything specific, but just a general sense of malaise and a feeling that somebody is pulling strings."

And the leaders take that generically obtuse advice and execute on it perfectly. Thus you have people exiting the company not for specific reasons, but because of "toxicity" and suspicion of unknown hanky-panky. And... profit!

Either we've got it wrong, or this organization is absolutely, without question, the greatest executor of nefarious organizational change management in decades.

by
|
Post ID: @1zji+Yadh2kM

I think a lot of the frustrating things that happen at Enbridge are caused by the weird management structure. The ratio of few people who actually do work vs people leaders is wacky. Managing 3-4 people does fill an entire 8 hour day, so to try to justify their roles, first level people leaders spend most of their time meeting with each other - a lot of this being update meetings without any objective other than keeping each other informed. Then, when the few worker bees who aren't people leaders need someone to make a decision or give them direction, they have to wait a week to find a free time slot in their people leader's calendar and then another week for the people leader to find time to run the decision by their manager ... then the worker bee is told to make a power point to explain the decision to the director ...the people leader and manager take 2 weeks reviewing and wordsmithing the power point that took the worker bee 1 day to create. and then a month goes by trying to find time in the director's calendar. The director thinks there's something going in a different department that might impact the thing they've been asked to decide .... so they advise the manager to talk to that department. The manager assigns that to the front line people leader... and the front line people leader assigns it to the worker bee. More time goes by setting up meetings and having to reschedule them to accommodate the 15 people who've decided they need to be involved in this decision. When the decision is finally made, the people leaders get busy updating each other on the decision and letting everyone know on Yammer.

by
|
Post ID: @1don+Yadh2kM

The unbearable work environment is more about the company rewarding bad behaviour among its managers than it is about deliberately creating a toxic workplace.

by
|
Post ID: @gnl+Yadh2kM

@Yadh2kM-qcr Seriously. Think about it. If they want to reduce costs a corporation can always just terminate people. Severance is not free, but removing someone from a team that isn't working out for the organization (for whatever reason, justified or not) can be done quite simply. Keeping unhappy people around is a cost on engagement and productivity.

There may be pockets of cowardly leaders who hope someone leaves -- but making work purposefully difficult or uncomfortable can be called 'constructive dismissal' and can lead to legal challenges. Only the most unethical, boiler-room style operations would advocate or tolerate this as a strategy.

Terminating people from roles you no longer need is not free, but it is the cheapest option.

by
|
Post ID: @ezf+Yadh2kM

Agree. It’s so strange, given all of the research findings that prove that a healthy workforce leads to increased productivity and ROI.

Not to mention that, well...doesn’t it just feel better to work in a healthy, supportive (or at the very least, non-toxic) environment?

I have to wonder who is advising AM and his henchmen. Or are they just making up the rules on their own as they go along? Does anyone know?

by
|
Post ID: @fet+Yadh2kM

Can you be more specific about what it is they are doing to make the workplace unbearable?

by
|
Post ID: @rry+Yadh2kM

This site is a layoff discussion site. If you didn't want to read complaining, you came to the wrong place.

by
|
Post ID: @sjk+Yadh2kM

You aren’t imagining it. They are hoping people will leave on their own. They have no respect or concern for their people. It’s all about reducing costs. Period.

by
|
Post ID: @qcr+Yadh2kM

Can it already with the complaining.

by
|
Post ID: @pcb+Yadh2kM

Post a reply

: