Thread regarding Optum layoffs

RTO Reality

A survey of 1,500 US managers found that 25% of C-suite leaders admitted using return-to-office (RTO) mandates to prompt resignations, while 20% of HR professionals said their policies were intended to make staff leave. Nearly 40% of managers said layoffs still followed because not enough workers quit.

Amazon has faced some of the strongest backlash, with 30,000 employees signing a petition, 1,800 pledging walkouts, and many “rage applying” to new jobs.

Data showed 99% of companies with RTO mandates reported lower engagement, almost half saw higher-than-expected attrition, and 29% faced recruitment difficulties.


by
| 2001 views | | 5 replies (last October 2) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1k6k6nkpx

5 replies (most recent on top)

Share reference link please. I think people should include this info in EXI

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ac+1k6k6nkpx

@a1 now you know one because it happened to me. Full time telecommute for 6 years and now I’m required to be in office 4 days a week starting 10/20. Why I keep seeing posts of people acting like this isn’t a real thing is beyond me

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a7+1k6k6nkpx

@a2 How do I tag WSJ in this? :D lol

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a5+1k6k6nkpx

They are not just asking “hybrid” employees to come in to collaborate. They are asking individuals hired on as full-time telecommuters to come in 4 days/wk -without a team- and work alone. That is obviously a push for attrition. I saw this on another post and now I’m curious if they are doing things on the up and up:

Why the SEC Would Care

Public companies are required to be truthful in their:
• 10-K and 10-Q filings (annual/quarterly reports)
• Risk factor disclosures
• Management discussion & analysis (MD&A) sections
• Workforce metrics and ESG reporting

If UHG/Optum:
• Advertised roles as full-time telecommute (a material hiring promise), then drastically changed terms (4 days in office, badge tracking, forced attrition),
• Structured the policy to push out local employees to avoid severance obligations,
• Did not disclose this risk to investors (i.e., potential mass resignations, lawsuits, compliance exposure), that could be considered misrepresentation, omission of material fact, or fraud under securities law.

There is no mention of these disclosures in their 10 K or 10 Q risk disclosures, if that is in fact, the intent.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a2+1k6k6nkpx

I know of ZERO coworkers asked to RTO.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a1+1k6k6nkpx

Post a reply

: