@cgw They trumped up charges for me too. My lawyer says I need the SAS policies on termination, layoffs, severance to strengthen my case. But I can't access the SAS policies anymore.
89 replies (most recent on top)
@cep I don't know about ERISA, but I would just add that SAS HR and SAS Legal are almost certainly accepting the word of your manager.
SAS was the least professional place I ever worked. In my case, and my friend’s case, the manager lied. So SAS HR and SAS Legal did not know the facts.
That’s why a simple letter from a lawyer may work. If you have a strong case, and SAS doesn’t know it, and your lawyer informs them, they may negotiate.
A letter is relatively cheap. If it doesn’t work, you can decide to spend more money, or walk away.
Good luck to you!
@ces I'd like to get the severance and unemployment benefits of a layoff rather than a gaslit termination. Does anyone know if SAS has an ERISA severance plan?
@cep My friend contemplated hiring a lawyer, but did not do it. I thought he had a strong legal case, but SAS offered him one year's pay. They correctly judged that was enough to induce him to sign an agreement and go away quietly.
What is your desired outcome of a successful engagement with a lawyer?
@yb Did your friend talk to a lawyer or just contemplate it? I am discussing my situation with a lawyer, and it would be good to know if other people tried and failed or didn't try at all.
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jqc5vwrc
@1s9+1jpe4sbdt when was the last time anyone talked about actually being laid off versus doom and gloom what ifs.
“Maybe now, with the VRBP, y’all can STFU?”
So you’re on a website who's purpose is to gripe about being laid off and related, and you want them to stop doing that?
What would you prefer people discuss your majesty?
Related, did you get your VRBP?
Maybe now, with the VRBP, y’all can STFU?
The UNCCH basketball team is like most of the UNC SAS employees I worked with. They could not walk their talk.
Sweetest ide of March is UNCCH being knocked out of the NCAA tournament!
"I didn't say that. I don't even have any idea what that means..."
Reminds me of a particular character high in management.
“ I think the "early retirements" are just the beginning of cleaning house. Buckle up, everyone!”
How many times over the past year or so have you posted a similar message?
Eventually you’ll be “right”
The original post had it right: it is the ides of March! Didn't have VRBP or new COO on my bingo card for the year! It was eerily quiet after company kickoff. I think the "early retirements" are just the beginning of cleaning house. Buckle up, everyone!
@10k+1jpe4sbdt I have always worked in R&D.
In your experience, SAS R&D is “no better or worse than others”. In my experience, it was worse than eight other employers.
At SAS, it is easy for different people to have completely different experiences. So there is no good reason to question the experience of others.
“ I worked at nine different companies. ”
Geesh. Are you sales or marketing?
I suspect they are very different worlds than R&D which is no better or worse than others.
“SAS is the most unprofessional workplace I've ever experienced.”
I worked at nine different companies. For me also, SAS was the most unprofessional workplace I experienced.
At SAS, there are no policies enforced to ensure professional behavior. So depending on whom they work with, employees can have completely different experiences.
There’s no good reason to question someone else’s experience.
“ I stated an opinion based on my experience. You don't have to agree with it. Not replying is the most neutral option, yet you choose to reply in order to counter it.”
Ditto
“ Saying my perception "is in my head" is also very demeaning.”
You are very hung up on words being demeaning or condescending.
Show me exactly where I said it is in your head… I’ll wait.
You stated your experience and opinion. I stated mine. What’s the problem?
"Oh brother" is condescending, regardless of how you slice it. I stated an opinion based on my experience. You don't have to agree with it. Not replying is the most neutral option, yet you choose to reply in order to counter it.
Saying my perception "is in my head" is also very demeaning. Of course my experience is in my head. But that doesn't mean that my experience is invalid. Minimizing or implying that another person's experience is invalid is also condescending.
“It is spelled with a “k” … skeptical”.”
Just as an FYI, “sceptical” is also an accepted spelling. It’s chiefly used by British people, as I understand it.
It is spelled with a “k” … skeptical”.
Your welcome.
(That second to last word is a joke.)
“ It automatically places management and the organization in the frame of "righteousness", while the employee is somehow "flawed". Give me a break.”
Oh brother. It does nothing of the sort. Being sceptical of one thing doesn’t equate to a glowing endorsement of another thing. That is happening in your mind not the person being sceptical.
“ SAS is the most unprofessional workplace I've ever experienced”
Oh brother. Where else have you worked. I’ve worked at 5 “big” tech companies. SAS is no worse than any of them. And before you put words in my mouth that does not mean I’m saying SAS is better than them.
"The technique is nasty and dirty, based on lies. But it works."
Thank you for sharing your experience. This is why those condescending "oh brother" responses pi-s me off so much. It automatically places management and the organization in the frame of "righteousness", while the employee is somehow "flawed". Give me a break.
SAS is the most unprofessional workplace I've ever experienced. You do your best be professional and function effectively amidst others engaging in questionable behavior. Then they turn around and give you the trumped up charge sheet. It's the pot calling the kettle black.
“Trumped-up charges” are false accusations designed to force an employee to leave.
There is no investigation into the charges. They are simply stated by the manager. HR always supports the manager.
I was not a tester, but I had my trumped-up charge sheet. It worked; I left.
A friend had his, and considered hiring a lawyer. He had a strong case. But he thought of how many years it might take to win, and he was offered severance to sign an NDA. So he took the money and left.
Usually these things are done quietly, which is why you never hear of them. The testers are the only large public example. They were falsely accused of being unwilling to learn new skills.
The technique is nasty and dirty, based on lies. But it works.
“ Please, keep pushing the myth of the infallible organization. The organization relies on you to keep those gaslights lit.”
I’ve never once suggested SAS is an infallible organisation, I have plenty of posts discussing the negatives that are concrete. Show me a post even remotely suggesting SAS is infallible…. You can’t because it doesn’t exist. But I guess if you are into vague, generic assertions that isn’t a problem.
And the organisation doesn’t rely on me or anyone else one on here. They couldn’t give a sh-t what anonymous people “think”.
“How many of those released Testers received the trumped up charge sheets? I bet all of them.”
I can’t newer that question because I’ve never seen. Trumped up charge sheet. No idea wtf that even means.
But I don’t have to answer the question. You already did when you “bet all of them”.
How many of those released Testers received the trumped up charge sheets? I bet all of them. They are welcome to set the record straight.
How many folks received trumped up charge sheets soon after a manager's friend interviewed for an open position? I know of at least one. They were released and the friend was soon hired.
How many of my small batch of colleagues, released just prior to me, received the trumped up charge sheets? I bet all of them, too. We were released and replaced by interns.
How many people have been warned about management setting little "traps" for "constructive dismissal"? I certainly was.
Please, keep pushing the myth of the infallible organization. The organization relies on you to keep those gaslights lit.
It makes more sense for the layoff severance to exceed the 2025 VRBP for these reasons:
- it is more painful psychologically to be laid off unexpectedly than to be given a choice of a buyout when you're 60+.
- the laid off folks are not limited to just 60+ that close to retirement, people in their 40s and 50s can get the layoffs too. These people will need to work much longer before reaching retirement age.
If you are 60+ and given VRBP offer, consider it as blessing and be thankful, whether you choose to take it or not.
"In response to the puzzled comments about the severance payout rate exceeding the new VRBP payout rate"
One thing I don't think I've seen anyone here mention yet - and maybe it's just me misremembering - is the 'greater of' on the healthcare contribution. My memory of the earlier offers was a monthly allowance until age 65 - and that's it? Am I remembering that correctly?
This one seems to guarantee that allotment for three years regardless of age.....
“ trumped-up charges option”… oh brother.
Shawshank Redemption - “Everyone in here is innocent”
In response to the puzzled comments about the severance payout rate exceeding the new VRBP payout rate, I’ll be surprised if the severance rate isn’t adjusted to match before the next round of layoffs.
Even if the SAS Finance division has calculated the probability of how many eligible employees will take the VRBO based on dollars proffered, I think JG’s attitude is likely this:
If you qualify, SAS has already paid you for at least a decade of service. Many of you could’ve taken the VRBO back in the fall of 2021 because you were already 60 years older then. If you worked for SAS long enough to qualify for > 6 months of pay (per the current severance policy), then I’ve already spent decades paying you, not to mention that you’ve cashed in on more than three of your greatest earning years at the all SAS since my last VRBO offer. During that time, company revenue decline has continued, especially when inflation is factored in. Viya is not the goose laying golden eggs and the V9 cash cow has no real growth future. Collectively, your efforts over the last 3+ years have not made SAS wealthier.
It doesn’t take fancy math to see why SAS is only offering 6 month’s salary for the current VRBO.
The beatings will continue until morale improves...if they don't get enough takers, will they chop the severance to match? Up the ante on the package? Extend the package to younger workers?
“…the VRBP is less enticing than just taking your chances against severance payouts…”
Seems to me the simplest explanation is that they're trying to get a feel for how many people really want to stop working this year. You're going to get paid longer not taking the buyout whether you want to work or not, so the only reason to take it is if you really were seriously thinking of retiring this year (or think you might get fired for cause) and six months of pay for no work sounds better than six months of pay while working.
The offer just kind of smokes those people out and gives management an idea of what proportion of an aging workforce plans on hitting the exits in the very short term?
Just spitballing but that does make sense to me and nothing else I've heard yet does.
“…the VRBP is less enticing than just taking your chances against severance payouts…”
Absolutely. They should have changed the severance policy so that its max payout is equal to the buyout’s.
The simplest explanation is that this is just one more mistake by people not good at math.
And why April 30th? Wouldn’t you wait until late in the year, to get a good idea how sales will be, before deciding how many people to buy out? That’s when the previous buyouts were done.
Just speculating... if SAS wants the option of selling or IPO’ing in the Fall, in that case they would want to reduce headcount now.
Let me see if I understand this correctly. There is a population of folks who have enough age and service to be offered the VRBO, but the VRBO is less enticing than just taking your chances against severance payouts via the trumped-up charges option. Am I understanding this correctly?
Did any of the folks crafting these policies take Math or Economics in college? Maybe I'm missing something here, but isn't the point of VRBO to entice folks to make the economic decision to leave, thus lowering expenses, rather than remain on the payroll at a heftier rate? Were any Financial or Monte Carlo analyses done that figure in the probabilities of accepting the payouts and the projected costs? I'd like to think that there were analyses such as this, but after having worked in R&D for some years, I'm pretty skeptical. Long-term planning does not seem to be one of SAS's strengths.
"On the other hand, if you take the buyout your last paycheck is this November.
If you don't take the buyout, you'll almost certainly get paid longer. (Unless, of course, fired for cause)"
This is it in a nutshell. If you are reasonably happy doing your job and need more money to feel comfortable to retire, it almost certainly makes most sense to keep working and decline the package.
Yeah, I think we are arguing the same basic philosophy. I'd just point out instead of 'four years of expenses' I'd use 'four years of expenses over and above Social Security benefits' (assuming you're ready to start drawing. If not, feel free to disregard this entire comment).
All of us under buyout consideration will get pretty strong SS checks because we've made good incomes for a long time, so the drawdown on retirement accounts CAN be pretty minimal if needed. Especially if you own your home and are debt-free. (Those seem to me to be even more basic pre-retirement goals than building a cash reserve)
For example, my thinking is that SS (mine and my wife's) will likely cover all of my current 'normal' living expenses aside from taxes and out of pocket healthcare (Medicare premiums, copays, etc). So presumably I'll only need to tap my 401k and investment accounts for those two items (plus the occasional trip, home repair, etc) anyway.
Keeping that in mind, I think a 6 months or so living expense reserve would easily translate to your four years of cash reserve without SS.
But yeah, I think we're agreeing on the underlying position, just quibbling on details
Anyway, I'm just kind of thinking out loud in this thread as I weigh the option of the buyout.
I think that we are arguing in favor of the same position. Having 4 years of expenses saved in cash means that the rest of the portfolio can be invested aggressively for the long-term growth that you point out is necessary. The idea is that at the beginning of any given year, if the market is down pay expenses from cash. But if the market is up (2 out of 3 times it is up for any given year), then pay expenses from the investments. Eventually social security payments will reduce the amount of expenses that need to be covered by cash, so the investment side of the balance can be even more aggressive.
The idea of 4 years of expenses in cash comes from noting that the market has rarely been down for 4 years straight. But the market has a great sense of humor, so who knows what joke it will try.
"The buyout could still be your best alternative. Might be the last chance before a new owner brings down the hatchet with far less generosity."
On the one hand, I think it's almost a dead certainty that both buyout and severance terms will become less generous over the next few years. Probably drastically so.
On the other hand, if you take the buyout your last paycheck is this November.
If you don't take the buyout, you'll almost certainly get paid longer. (Unless, of course, fired for cause)
It's unlikely that the changes will be that great that fast in the same calendar year with no change in ownership, right?