Any guess as to how they choose who to layoff when they pick a couple or even one person out of an entire team?
10 replies (most recent on top)
A much admired VP who had been with the company for more than 25 years, a much respected Senior Director who has with the company for more than 20 years, a manager who had been with the company for more than 30 years. All "retired" out. Feel very sad that this is how things are being run now.
My RD was told that they have a formula that looks at several things (that ofc they can’t disclose), but performance isn’t one. About 5 people I work collaborate with were laid off ranging from a CMO to an Admin Asst.
RIFs- Age & Salary met their selection criteria. Bet they made you sign as part of severance acceptance - agreed not to suit if you falls into age group of 45+.
Those with longer tenure and higher salaries are the ones that were laid off even high performing employees. UHC has no loyalty to their employees, but demand employees have loyalty to the company. That is why year over year employee satisfaction is down and they do nothing. They reduce their workforce add more to employees left behind, they talk about burnout and how they address it but it’s all bs, while posting revenue of $530 billion, and they layoff good employees. In 4 months those positions will be reposted and they will hire younger candidates and pay them half of what the laid off employees were making. The average age of employees laid off in my UHC segment was 47. There is no algorithm as someone mentioned above, they simply pick those with the higher salaries within the same role and cut them. People have worked hard in the careers to get to where they are and UHC does not care about them. Do not believe their social media posts that “It’s a great place to work”, it’s not. You don’t see Andrew Witty taking a pay cut, nor those at the executive level in order to keep employees, no they rather layoff good employees and move on.
It's absolutely an HR algorithm that picks employees that are laid off. I was told this by an old manager of mine who had to deliver the news to her top performer! They aren't allowed to provide ANY input on who goes or stays. I've survived 3 lay offs so far, I truly feel horrible for my friends and coworkers in this situation.
Unless your a complete mo--n, your going to choose the person with the least impact overall to your teams priorities. If not, the teams productivity issues will fall back to you. Corp will choose cost. So you will lose your most skilled or longest in position so likely most knowledgeable.
Favoritism. Literally has nothing to do with performance or skills. It’s not a great way to run a business…
Everyone has a boss
What if its the leader that is let go?
Seems to be a mix of everything. I e seen top performers axed while low hanging fruit stays, and I’ve seen the opposite in other teams. Maybe it depends on the leader?