You may do that, but can't sign the severance.
21 replies (most recent on top)
dont be naive, many large co's use forced-ranking, and uhg/optum is no exception. they've done it in the past, and this is 100% true- teams/groups must meet a pre-determined percentage of 5,4,3,2/1. what happens next is very likely: employee at will + 'low' performance = substantiated rif. they fight and win against doj, so 1 of 400k is no problem for their team of very well paid lawyers
Anyone actually been through this mysterious 'arbitration' process? Just curious.
They make up vague reasons to put you on a CAP without supporting evidence or made up reasons like others said something. Totally BS.
I wouldn't put it past some of these "Leaders." Be a whistle blower and protect yourself legally with defense, OCR, HHS, and EOE. Then when they strike sue em'. They're not smart enough not to retaliate.
I believe the only exception to arbitration is 'protected status' race, gender discrimination claims.
@ar
Your employment agreement you signed revokes your right to anything other than arbitration. And as stated in a post here, we are all employees at will. Unless something is egregious and obvious fighting termination is usually an expensive exercise in futility.
Short story, we can be let go anytime they darn well please. This is not an Optum thing, it's pretty much standard procedure
They get around official termination by instead making you part of a RIF or layoff. They will say it has nothing to do with your performance but then only do it to the lowest performer who happened to get a 2. I have been forced to give a 2 when it wasn’t deserved. I’ve been asked for my “lowest 3” so they know who to bump down to a 2 if needed to meet the curve.
@ab Not so sure. Agree with the comment that UHG could be getting smarter. UHC had the voluntary thing and you can bet those who could get a better job left while stragglers stayed.
Numbers will tell you it's more productive to keep a hard worker who's more expensive than a mediocre one that's cheaper within the same jurisdiction. Yes, they fire an expensive American and replace with a far cheaper Indian, but I think someone figured out that the math doesn't math within one country.
@ap Tagging people 2 makes it easier to RIF who aren't busting their b@lls and risking heart failure to boost SH's "can't take it with you" fund.
UHG will simply RIF vs terminate with cause. If you have 10 people at one SG doing similar work, the algo will gravitate to cut the most recent hire or the most expensive one. Now, adding a performance metric means that the most expensive one in the group is worth keeping vs the "2" in the middle of the salary pack.
@ap many states allow termination at the will of the company. There doesn't have to be a justifiable reason.
Curious. Do such terminations get disputed via arbitration or are they handled through a lawsuit?
@af You do know that without well documented performance drop off it's quite easy to contest termination, right?
The company can't just hand you a 2 and pretend you're a bad worker. If you get terminated because of that and challenge it, they literally have to provide all documentation that lead to it and defend themselves.
I am a manager with UCH/Optum and have not been asked this yet.
@ag Having to give a 3 is a lot different than having to give a 1 or 2. I'm sure there are processes in place so that a manager doesn't just give everyone a 5.
I think the comments here, as usual, are being way too doom and gloom about very normal processes.
@ag it depends on your leader/division. I’ve been in areas where I had to have just as many 1’s and 2’s as 5’s. Then those were put on PIPs. Then in others I’ve never been forced to push people down to a 2 that didn’t deserve it.
In my opinion, it’s all dependent on segment or division leadership and how they’ve decided to handle. If people would rate honestly, then you’d definitely see a variety of ratings. However, you see many people who think their team is all 5’s which is likely not the case either.
@aa
The post you are referring to isn't entirely false. I had a team of 5 people and was forced to stack rank them. I had to give a 3 to at least one individual. That person was subsequently RIF'd. To be CAP'd (performance plan) you do however need some empirical evidence. Our HR is so weak though poor performance can be fairly easily contrived.
@aa sounds logical, but stack ranking is not logical. past 3 years they enforced a bell curve. Someone always gets a 2. "if you are a clear good performer...." You are living in a logical world. None of OI/OT is logical.
Reality is 4-5s will get canned if their salary is in the matrix, and lower paid 2-3 will stay.
Those scores have nothing to do with large layoffs.
@a2 this doesn't even make sense. To PIP and subsequently get rid of someone, you need justifiable evidence that their performance fell off. In a huge company like UHG/Optum, the last thing they want to deal with is a lawsuit for this stuff.
If you give a clear good performer a 2, they're going to challenge it and it's going to stick out. You need evidence to back up that 2, and saying "they weren't as good as the best guy" isn't enough.
I call complete BS on this comment, it reeks of someone who's upset they got cut.
Standard stack ranking in OI and OT, there is a bell curve and if you don't give a 2, your manager or above will decide. Doesn't matter how well they did, or how well the dept did. Someone gets a 2. That said, they will be put on a PIP and moved out the door. You could have a team of 5's that makes millions, you have to grade on a curve and someone gets a 2.