Were the people laid off selected by HR or was management involved in selecting individuals.
8 replies (most recent on top)
one trick is to reorg to get all the people you want to get rid of in the same group. Then the age discrimination goes poof. So if you have a couple groups with a diversity of ages reorg in discards (older folks). and keep (young cheap). Then take a couple layoff rounds to get rid of the discard group all squeaky clean.
Lots of factors, for ESRO it was performance and cost driven. Leaders such as Nico was fired for many reasons mention on here. Others were a cost decision. The reality is… it doesn’t matter.. karma is a bi--h…
They have to have the illusion of fair and balanced. You take older experience (expensive) workers and add younger people so it doesn't look like age descrimination. This is why ages and grades are reported in the RIF reports.
@OP It depends. HR factors when they have determine which grades will be eliminated and JDs written for lower grade with a different title.
There has been times when a VP will make the decision. Usually there is a problem downstream where clients are involved. Some VPs are very savvy and know how to manage through this, some of the newer VPs don't care and will sacrifice good people.
Then there are numbers required and recommendation based on performance. The manager has to provide the name.
Not HR all they do is look to see if the tribute is any protected class that may gum up the works with litigation. Victim list is usually made about 2 levels up from the target from the standard worker drone.
I know a manager who found out FROM the employee who was let go. Pretty messed up.
@a5 I was a direct manager and not asked for names nor notified until it happened so I think it depends on which business line/hierarchy
typically management is involved - up the chain a number of people is requested to be RIF'd, and that percolates downward until direct managers are given a choice: give 1 or 2 names. There is no other choice in the matter.