Thread regarding Dell Inc. layoffs

Not thinning the herd

That's not the plan. It's much cheaper to offer a severance package than to let people quit on their own.

What happens is the good ones are the first to quit; the poor performance ones linger and stay on. They don't want that. That is why there is no longer a voluntary severance.

Your manager will tell you to opt for remote. Then in subsequent quarters they will pick and choose from the remote list as to who to keep or layoff.

It's a controlled bleeding and remotes will be first picks when possible

by
| 2801 views | | 11 replies (last February 4, 2024) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1qT6YvF7

11 replies (most recent on top)

Severance pay is a tax deductible expense. The cost reduction is immediate. Even if you are long tenure. The severance package break even after a few months of clever accounting, then cost savings kick in the remaining year until they decide to hire again.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1zez+1qT6YvF7

@ttp+1qT6YvF7

the problem is, aside from you being incoherent, you think the math is 2+2

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1zod+1qT6YvF7

@ttp+1qT6YvF7, you should probably read what you wrote again. :)

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dlr+1qT6YvF7

What?! That's not how it works. Thats not how any of this works. LOL. It is NOT cheaper to pay severance than to let people quit. They owe you NOTHING if you quit. If I quit (25 years) they would owe me a very sizable amount of money.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ttp+1qT6YvF7

As it should be

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @uks+1qT6YvF7

"If people quit, you owe them nothing... Severance is far more expensive than people leaving of their own accord."

It sadly reflects how simple minded you are thinking it's 2+2 math.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ywu+1qT6YvF7

If people quit, you owe them nothing... Severance is far more expensive than people leaving of their own accord.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fhp+1qT6YvF7

Makes no difference
The laid off are the lucky onea.
Dell has no clue what ot wants to be.
Leadership is overpaid dead weight living in the dark ages.
That is the big issue.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @vjy+1qT6YvF7

My post had nothing to do with the layoffs. You dim wits cannot even comprehend simple subject matters.

As for those laid off. It's not that they were poor performers. It's that they were perceived to have low ROI relative to their salary. Get it?

But i understand you need to tell yourself you were a rockstar despite getting laid off. If this helps you get through this then so be it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @emd+1qT6YvF7

Yeah that’s just not true.
This round of layoffs some of the most talented and dedicated employees I knew were let go while the poor performers are still here. It’s because the good performers get promoted and cost more while the useless never go anywhere.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ojl+1qT6YvF7

Ok, HR.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @uzj+1qT6YvF7

Post a reply

: