I’m curious as to how layoffs work at ADP. Any insights from those actually involved in the process? At what level does the decision come from? Who makes the decision on specific individuals? Are they given a dollar savings to achieve, or a number of people? I imagine it varies, but I’ve always been curious as to what goes into the process.
7 replies (most recent on top)
There use to be a time when “ being kept” was a great thing. Ummm! Not so much, unless you like low pay for doing the job of many. I’m glad I got out, with BANK, much earlier. Through a pandemic, it HAS TO BE HORRIBLE.
The last post by @3qij+1a5XJu86 is spot on. I know of a big fat POS manager who is notorious for this. He is a real piece of cow manure. He has made up completely false performance scores for people so that when he laid off people he had something to falsely attempt to backup getting rid of good employees. Actually some of the very absolute best. It is an ADP HR "go to" plan for management to do on people that really are the good employees yet they think the can/should replace in order to save some money or not be concerned that those good employees could ever make them look bad by exposing they were far less qualified for their position than those they were pushing out the door. ADP has turned into a nightmare place to work.
When layoffs happen, managers first have to drum up low and often made up performance scores "just in case" the layoff is challenged. So not only do you get the boot, they send you out with your reputation falsely tarnished so managers can sleep easier about their decision.
Well, I learned a long time ago, when people do things they are ashamed of like laying people off for invalid reasons like greed they tend to not be transparent and make up all kinds of excuses because they don't want to be seen a—h-i-t-y people.
So, SVP and VP chose the individuals? That’s what I’m curious about. I understand it’s to reduce costs, and they may make their decisions based on different criteria, but who makes the call? The affected individuals’ managers, or is it higher up?
I know for a fact that the decision is based on cost reduction. They target people based on compensation first and foremost regardless of how much they have contributed or their skills and abilities. You could be Jesus and walk on water, but if you were (in the past) compensated properly for your ability to walk on water or perform miracles, you make this list for reduction.
First, they target those with the knowledge and experience and skills that can expose them the easiest. Usually, the t–ds in SVP and VP positions that are their now have no skills, except to be in a position to hurt others and thus that is what they do. They are given marching orders to cut costs and then they look at how they can stay afloat a little longer themselves before the execs realize they screwed up big time and put them into SVP or VP position to start with. It is merely t–ds in the toilet bowl just trying to stay afloat by stinking things up for the good people.