Thread regarding AT&T layoffs

“So, I'm assuming you're trying to say per their own policy, if they're asking you to relocate, they have to provide relocation assistance, right? Yeah, they already covered themselves there by positioning it as your position moving, not you. They leave a decision to either follow the position or not up to you, so they're no "relocating" you, and won't provide any assistance.” Wow if they do that it’s a next level a--hole move. Not a good look at all. Your position is moving not you unless you apply for it and the win that bid hence it’s your idea?

AirBnB, hotel and extended stay places do not count towards the relo, we’ve already been told it has to be a permanent move and change of address. Already have some senior managers trying to do that and they were told no. We’ll see, we all know this won’t be applied evenly. I have to go into an office and drive 1.5hrs each way, even though no one from my team will be there, but my L4 gets to remote work because they are further than 50 miles even though most of their team is in their same hub area. Idk how that works at their level. So much for collaboration. I’d much rather take the severance and move on.

“I believe there is a fine legal line that’s already been crossed by JS simply announcing the “generous relocation package “ if the company pays certain demographics it can be a viewed as discriminatory.”
You mean like how they bragged to the whole company about only hiring or promoting individuals from certain demographics? Nah, that couldn’t possibly be discrimination because it was only against those evil white men, it’s perfectly legal and encouraged to discriminate against them. But you see it’s only for the lower level management positions. Rules for thee but not for me.

I’ve heard relocation will be available for 5th and 6th levels and 4th levels who supervise others. No one else will get it, because the whole point of RTO is to reduce the workforce. Why make it easy to stay?

"AT&T will not pay relo money because they know you will more than likely be laid off within 1-2 years anyway. . . knowing you won't be able to pay it back after your lay off."

How thoughtful of them. LOL

AT&T will not pay relo money because they know you will more than likely be laid off within 1-2 years anyway. Maybe it's their way of avoiding a lawsuit or knowing you won't be able to pay it back after your lay off.

I believe there is a fine legal line that’s already been crossed by JS simply announcing the “generous relocation package “ if the company pays certain demographics it can be a viewed as discriminatory.

"It's the standard management FAQ. If you go to HR Onestop, then do a search on relocation, you will find the relocation page, and if you scroll down, you will find a link from the Management FAQ. The quotes came from there."

Thanks; so then this sentence still applies:
AT&T is not providing relo money for anyone, so none of that applies...

"AT&T is not providing relo money for anyone, so none of that applies to these HUB relocations. Also, please cite your source. Is it the standard management FAQ, or is it something that has been released specifically relating to this HUB initiative and you have access to information that others do not?"

It's the standard management FAQ. If you go to HR Onestop, then do a search on relocation, you will find the relocation page, and if you scroll down, you will find a link from the Management FAQ. The quotes came from there.

And here's the IRS interpretation: If a company gives an employee money to move, it must actually be a real move, greater than 50 miles more than previous commute. Otherwise, if a company pays for a move either within town, or if the employee just buys/rents a secondary residence using company money, it would be reviewable as fraud.

AT&T is not providing relo money for anyone, so none of that applies to these HUB relocations. Also, please cite your source. Is it the standard management FAQ, or is it something that has been released specifically relating to this HUB initiative and you have access to information that others do not?

Exactly right, read carefully! I've had 3 company paid relocations because I was specifically asked to be onsite in the job at the new location. On the other hand, I've applied for a few positions, and at the bottom of everyone, it said "no relocation available". The relocation budget and relo plan are approved by L3 and L4. And I've not seen any organization at the L4 level has a budget for this.

Yeah...I think you're trying to support the assertion some have made that you can't rent an Airbnb or other apartment and go back and forth.

Issues with that, per your this FAQ:
"Company-initiated relocation benefits..." The company has said that there is no relocation $. So AT&T has no say where the employee lays their head at night or each weekend.
The permanent residence reference is because if the company is paying, it must be a "bone fide" move, per IRS since company $ is involved.

Perfect. Now just show me that language in your union contract and you should be good to go.

It’s based on budget which there is none.

So, I'm assuming you're trying to say per their own policy, if they're asking you to relocate, they have to provide relocation assistance, right? Yeah, they already covered themselves there by positioning it as your position moving, not you. They leave a decision to either follow the position or not up to you, so they're no "relocating" you, and won't provide any assistance.