What type of signal does this give the rest of those who are in the dark? Surely people at that level should be in the know of what will happen as we're just a couple of days away from the 9/24 date but they claim they have no idea.
18 replies (most recent on top)
boss given her names Friday hasnt known for weeks
the other poster if they have known for weeks was part of the choosing of team members
List created and given to HR July 31
You, as a manager, can ABSOLUTELY tell your direct reports. That would be the human and moral thing to do. Sc--w productivity. Tell these people they are about to be sc--wed and fu-k your productivity.
Everyone being laid off deserves as much time as they can possibly get to look for something better while still getting a paycheck to simply pay their bills and feed their children. I could not give a single fu-k about a corporate entities fu--ing profits and productivity. It all goes to the top of the company to buy these a--holes new mansions and yachts.
Fu-k them.
If you, as a manager, learn someone is being fired, TELL THEM.
I was told who to fire and given several weeks advance notice. There’s no good way for a manager to handle this. U tell someone safe that they are safe and then everyone you didn’t talk to assumes they are fired. U can’t respond point blank to someone and say actually u will be fired in a few week or lie to them. It’s awkward. If they know they are out, productivity goes down from many. There no such thing as a well executed layoff except if you made everyone rich on their way out. I get that people are upset and anxious. There’s no good answer and you’re right to fault leadership for putting us i this position when we could have bought marvel instead of buying back stock for billions to make execs rich.
@2nlk+1uzBpE4j I think the name and age list is part of OWPBA disclosure.
With the Nick layoffs a couple knew the night before. My direct VP had no idea. There was a list that was leaked for the entire org and I can assure you there was absolutely zero rhyme or reason to the cuts. It even had peoples ages. Didn’t matter. Oh and we got emails in alphabetical order and it was absolutely torture. Have fun!
They know. However, they can't talk about it. I agree both transparency and communication have been non-existent surrounding it all which breeds distrust.
Favoritism from the department heads in some circumstances no matter how great you are at your job, if they don't like you for the smallest reason they will cut you. Children on a playground!
Bleed orange? You're identifying too much with a job
To who said, “ merit takes a backseat to salary when it comes to choose the impacted ones.” This is true partly. Remember, probably, the Company must be analysing the whole list, as a whole, to balance it out to make it hard for groups to sue. So, some people, it might be they lose out because of a flip of a coin.
I have heard from a few Senior Manager that they are having meetings with HR today and tomorrow about the layoffs ahead of Mondays official announcements
If they are the ones doing the layoff - they will know by the end of week to prepare and have meeting with HR in regards
I know Nick folks said layoffs went out by email on another thread so that would be different
"...And the worst part, quality team members who lived the brand and bled orange were out while some less effective people stayed..."
This is exactly what I fear will happen! When the immediate goal is to save money, merit takes a backseat to salary when it comes to choose the impacted ones.
It' also about about salaries. You make too much, than you are a target. If you make too little, then you and someone else who makes too little can both be a target together. Kinda takes the motivation to make money away...
I posted this on another thread here… very, very few people know, including many senior leadership and def not VPs. With the layoffs at Nick, there was a request of the CMO for 20-25% in cuts and a list was created. That was not the list HR used. They ended up cutting 60%! People who were on the “list” were saved and people not on the list, who did get a heads up that they were safe, ended up being gone. And the remaining senior leadership was not involved in the final decision making. And the worst part, quality team members who lived the brand and bled orange were out while some less effective people stayed. No rhyme or reason. Other than maybe whoever did make the final list did their own cherry picking?? People do not really know, even if they provided guidance on projects and lists. It’ll be arbitrary. It won’t be about keeping rock star employees vs less effective employees. And that’s the worst part of all.
They might have signed NDA's (Non-Disclosure Agreements
Obviously they can't legally tell anybody anything too specific
I meant to ask whether this is indicative of someone on that level being at risk as well and that is why they do not know. The question kinda answers itself now that I think about it.
If so, then how is that broken chain of communication handled then? Sorry, new-ish to the company.
You have to remember that many of them will be affected too.
If they had been told already, it would have been leaking out.