Thread regarding Citigroup Inc. / Citibank / Citi layoffs

HR is useless. This whole debacle just amplifies this revelation. Time to let them go.

As if the layoffs or threat therein aren’t bad enough, dealing with HR makes it exponentially worse. Its like a last dig from Citi. Yeah, we’re letting you go but now deal with these clowns, let the games begin.

Post after post of HR telling you they’ll reach out to you and don’t. Missed callbacks, vague emails, rushed meetings with individuals with no substance or direction, wrong or lacking instructions, the list goes on and on.

by
| 1211 views | | 11 replies (last April 5, 2024) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1rNAsJ2L

11 replies (most recent on top)

You're wrong - they are NOT useless. Their function is not to help the rank and file but upper management. The last thing they want is an enlightened workforce. Keep us so scared about our jobs that we won't demand anything. So don't expect any service from HR.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @6qih+1rNAsJ2L

I can’t imagine how a HR temp with no knowledge of Citi could be any worse than what we have now. Maybe not any better but certainly not any worse.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @6ypf+1rNAsJ2L

Temp HR personnel. That’s an interesting consideration. How does this work? Hire contractors from a contracting agency? Hire the Big4?

There would be knowledge consistently challenges with either approach.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4pea+1rNAsJ2L

The expectation is for HR to be:
a.) helpful
b.) accurate
c.) timely
d.) competent.
e.) honest
If this expectation is too high a bar for them to reach, then what purpose do they serve to the bottom line of progress? You can operate off of a skeleton crew of HR personnel and outsource\temp HR as you need them. “Oh SNAP!!! We need to layoff in 2 months, lets hire some temp HR for a few months to assist with that.” would make more sense as it’d be cheaper and you would not have HR personnel bloat, like we do now, of people who can’t rise to the HUGE challenge of “a” through “e” above.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4peg+1rNAsJ2L

What is the expectation of HR in this case?

How does that expectation change from one company to another?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4son+1rNAsJ2L

If HR was impacted during this round of layoffs, the percentage of HR let go is not high enough.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4ksa+1rNAsJ2L

If you don’t know, some of these same folks are impacted.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3qvx+1rNAsJ2L

If just 10% of the negative posts are true about HR, then yes, they need to be let go and replaced by temp workers.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2rdy+1rNAsJ2L

Agreed.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1suq+1rNAsJ2L

Recently HR incompetence is in rare form that’s for sure. Their bumblings seem to have no end. I mean if this is as good as it gets from HR, why not just hire HR temps as you need them at a low cost and let the hiring contract expire after all the heavy lifting is done, keeping just a skeleton crew.

Is it really that hard to relate accurate information to the people you are letting go?
“Here is how you contact those over your 401K, here is their number, here is their email, here is the link to their site”. Its not like this information dynamically changes throughout the day.

Is it really that hard to followup on a callback. “I’ll call you back at 2PM. This is your correct number in which to reach you right”. Jot it down in the calendar and actually call them back.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qxu+1rNAsJ2L

They have 5000+ people to deal with. But that is no excuse.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qdh+1rNAsJ2L

Post a reply

: