Jess👾
The fact that employers publicly announce that they're laying off their "lowest performers" is shockingly cruel. Not only are you depriving someone of their livelihood, you're publicly branding them as a poor performer to harm their ability to get a new job.
That's not something you do simply to cut costs, that's targeted intentional cruelty to terrorize your existing employees into overwork and quell dissidents.
mark
@JessTheUnstill @vijfhoek we did a mid year review so nobody should be surprised at their end of year rating. Rating results for ICs will be released this coming Wednesday. Most of the people saying they are shocked by the performance excuse are correct.
Jess👾
@vijfhoek I'm sure if you could someone would have tried it already.
But I'm sure they do have something in the employee record about how these people had gotten at least one below average performance review in the last X years or something
Sijmen
@JessTheUnstill@infosec.exchange I wonder if you can sue for this, for defamation or something
Rich Felker
@JessTheUnstill Need a precedent establishing these announcements as libel.
Jess👾
There's always a stigma against laid off people already. But come on ... Just put out there something like "we're sorry to lose these employees, but shifting business needs and priorities required us to rebalance our job titles and headcount across multiple divisions."
Idk, say various words that don't imply they're "bad", just a bland "it's not you, we just don't have the right chemistry anymore".
Rich Felker
@JessTheUnstill @vijfhoek I don't think that helps if they said "lowest performing". They're not accusing the laid off employees of having "at least one negative review" but being overall worse than everyone kept.
CartyBoston
@JessTheUnstill yes! Employers used to bend over backwards to insist that positions had been eliminated and layoffs were *not* based on performance because they were worried about being sued for circumventing reasonable performance management practice.
"Cruel" is a strong word and it's appropriate here.
Ben Ramsey
@JessTheUnstill @catsalad This is part of a deliberate effort to lower market rates for software engineers. By flooding the market with laid-off workers, and by labeling many of them as “under performers,” they can drive down salaries across the industry. This is their way of resetting and gaining the leverage in hiring.
Jess👾
Sure, but if I'm going to guess, they have some NDA, mandatory binding arbitration, can't class action us bullshit going on...
@dalias @vijfhoek
Rich Felker
@JessTheUnstill @vijfhoek Illegal in some jurisdictions.
mark
@JessTheUnstill @vijfhoek mostly meaning that many people didn't know they were potentially impacted. When someone is doing OK at the midpoint, and continue at that level, they dont expect to get canned, or even a meets most. That is a gap of management. Most likely from above the Frontline people managers
Jess👾
Meaning that they may have downgraded many people's reviews below what the person expected?
That'd be some lovely juice to uncover in discovery...
@ATLeagle @vijfhoek
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.