So what is? Does anybody know?
18 replies (most recent on top)
@b7 they want to use AI. They don’t give a cr-p about members.
@br change that to company loses billions, not millions
My guess is they’re using some kind of algorithm—likely a consultant firm applying AI recommendations or filters in a spreadsheet. It’s clear the decision-makers have little understanding of what these employees do, how their work affects the company’s bottom line, or how a RIF might impact operations.
The apparent target pool seems to include advanced individual contributors, senior managers, directors, and VPs. Observed risk factors for being selected include:
• Managing three or fewer direct reports (easier to reassign)
• Age over 50
• Hired during the high-wage competition years (2021–2023)
• 15+ years tenure with multiple promotions or off-cycle raises
• Recent history of medical leave
• High performers with outsized impact
• Roles tied to government programs
• Internal-facing roles (IT, CX, UX, Sales Support, etc.)
These are only observed trends, not confirmed policies. They likely stem from analyzing salary relative to peers, which fails to capture employees who drive significant savings or revenue. I also question how (or if) they’re accounting for systemic bias—especially around age—since the patterns look like a potential age discrimination case in the making.
Please share any other trends you’ve noticed that may increase the risk of being let go.
@bm Not a complaint at all. It is widely known, and we have lost basically all veteran talent at this point. We cannot hire good externals, and we cannot keep our semi-recent staff. New hires quit as soon as they realize the s--t they are in. We are forced to make excuses to our employees when they point out very real observations and ask valid questions. It feels very wrong, forcing this narrative, this lie, when no one on either end believes it. This whole year has been off, and now we are suppose to act like this s---tshow is not happening? There is a HUGE push to have the TX plan fully staffed no later than 12/1-- something like 1 million new members? Meanwhile we are running on fumes and trying to persuade everyone things are hunky-dory!
The reason is simple. Company loses million but Maurice needs his bonus...
@b7 i wouldn’t expect your complaints of being short-staffed to be heard. Just recently, I heard someone say that our clinical staff currently perform at half the output of clinical staff at other healthcare companies. If anything, expect to be asked to do more with fewer people
Has anyone heard about Clin Ops or strategy? What about clinical staff? All of a sudden everyone has become very tightlipped and stand-offish. We have clinical staff (MD, DO, RN, APRN, LCPC, LCSW) and support staff in 7 states and all are WFH! We can barely support our members with what few staff we have right now!!
@a7 We lost a Sr. Director who was valuable to our team, our dept, and multiple other business areas. Our team's loss is going to take weeks/months to recover from.
@a1 “this rif seems to be motivated by saving $$.“
Most RIFs are.
@a8 I'm a leader and have absolutely no insight into who is on the list and we have not been told anything
@a7 Yes!!!! I kept trying to find logic behind it but personal leadership issues is all I can think of at this point. Leadership hated that I asked questions and pushed for actual work vs. repetitive bandages and rework and called it new deliverables. Wasn’t visible for idle chit chat, my boss brought in a friend/old colleague of her recently as a consultant (can bet he is still there or being promoted lol). Never received under a 3 and was a 4 last year. So personal grudge is all that makes sense especially when another Sr. Director I was working with was all talk and no work but I can bet he is still there due to visibility and friendship with my leader. An I call Bullsh-t when some of the leaders are saying we didn’t know some had a hand in this decision if not directly then in a round about way.
Sort descending based on salary, age, and tenure. Then pick those people who are not visible to leadership and those people not liked by leadership (personal, cultural, race or whatever).
@a5 I needed that thank you! 🤣
I work in HR and can tell you.
It's based off the current retrograde of the Moon and what the birth sign of the employee is. We came up with an advanced calculation that uses these two factors combined with their high school GPA and if they own any Labubus or not.
I hope this helps.
high performance or not, hcsc seems to need the money more and if it hurts the company in the long run.... they will deal with it later. which makes me think, how much did the c-suite really mess up? it must have been really bad that they had to do the rif regardless of hurting hcscs reputation.
high performance or not, hcsc seems to need the money more and if it hurts the company in the long run.... they will deal with it later. which makes me think, how much did the c-suite really mess up? it must have been really bad.
looks like they’re going after the people with high salaries in long tenures.
mostly compensation and redundancy (true or not). this rif seems to be motivated by saving $$.