4 ms·

I've always liked the idea of a month of severance per year worked, starting at three months after the first year. Then again, that sort of deal doesn't always

by ivl 10y ago

I've always liked the idea of a month of severance per year worked, starting at three months after the first year. Then again, that sort of deal doesn't always work, or fit the business.

p4wnc6 10y ago
I wouldn't consider working for a company that offered only 3 months of severance when I first join them. I don't mind if severance increases by about 1 month of salary per year thereafter, but the initial amount has to be enough to actually sustain your life over the course of an average-case next job search, which includes possibly being forced to relocate, incur travel costs for interviewing, etc., and a need to not have to worry about how your insurance will be provided. I'd say the minimum I would consider reasonable would be 6 months, maybe more in higher cost of living areas. That's just the cost of doing business.
- citizens 10y ago
  Do you negotiate this when you join the company?
- gwbas1c 10y ago
  What kind of role do you have?
- jwhitlark 10y ago
  That seems strange to me. Were I hiring someone, I'd expect to negotiate salary, and provide 1-3 months severance. Heavy negotiating about how much I'll pay them if they're NOT working for me would set off alarm bells.
  - p4wnc6 10y ago
    This would set off alarm bells for me about working for you, because in many areas and situations a flat rate of 3 months severance is not reasonable. You'd effectively be asking me to take a large risk, unwilling to negotiate about it, and trying to impart negative intentions or "fishiness" onto me even just for asking. That's a lot of red flags.
    - jwhitlark 10y ago
      I don't understand what the risk is. Are you talking about relocation?
      - p4wnc6 10y ago
        Many companies, especially start-ups, do erratic things, like hire someone and then lay them off weeks or months later even if they are doing a good job, because of restructuring, funding failures, etc. I've seen it happen many times. If you relocate for a job, or give up a stable current job, or a number of other things, you're just essentially trusting the new company not to do this to you, and often it's completely blind trust and you have no way to know in advance if your trust is well-placed. If they are willing to compensate you for a situation where they unexpectedly (not due to any cause by you, like poor performance or insubordination or something) throw you into unemployment, possibly in a new location where you lack a professional network to find the next job, or where you would not choose to stay apart for the job you took, it shows a willingness on their part to earn your trust. It's extremely bizarre to me to hear someone characterize taking a new job by saying "I don't understand what the risk is." It's a huge, huge risk every time that the new place is going to treat you badly and that you could not have seen it ahead of time because they didn't emit red flags during the hiring process. And many ways of them erratically treating you badly results in you suddenly having no income or insurance and needing to figure out what to do -- a situation that should absolutely never be financed out of your personal savings (though, often it is because people rarely negotiate adequate severance). Perhaps you've been very lucky with working for good companies and just haven't experienced how prevalent this is.

by ivl 10y ago

I've always liked the idea of a month of severance per year worked, starting at three months after the first year. Then again, that sort of deal doesn't always work, or fit the business.

p4wnc6 10y ago

I wouldn't consider working for a company that offered only 3 months of severance when I first join them. I don't mind if severance increases by about 1 month of salary per year thereafter, but the initial amount has to be enough to actually sustain your life over the course of an average-case next job search, which includes possibly being forced to relocate, incur travel costs for interviewing, etc., and a need to not have to worry about how your insurance will be provided. I'd say the minimum I would consider reasonable would be 6 months, maybe more in higher cost of living areas. That's just the cost of doing business.

citizens 10y ago
Do you negotiate this when you join the company?
gwbas1c 10y ago
What kind of role do you have?
jwhitlark 10y ago
That seems strange to me. Were I hiring someone, I'd expect to negotiate salary, and provide 1-3 months severance. Heavy negotiating about how much I'll pay them if they're NOT working for me would set off alarm bells.
- p4wnc6 10y ago
  This would set off alarm bells for me about working for you, because in many areas and situations a flat rate of 3 months severance is not reasonable. You'd effectively be asking me to take a large risk, unwilling to negotiate about it, and trying to impart negative intentions or "fishiness" onto me even just for asking. That's a lot of red flags.
  - jwhitlark 10y ago
    I don't understand what the risk is. Are you talking about relocation?
    - p4wnc6 10y ago
      Many companies, especially start-ups, do erratic things, like hire someone and then lay them off weeks or months later even if they are doing a good job, because of restructuring, funding failures, etc. I've seen it happen many times. If you relocate for a job, or give up a stable current job, or a number of other things, you're just essentially trusting the new company not to do this to you, and often it's completely blind trust and you have no way to know in advance if your trust is well-placed. If they are willing to compensate you for a situation where they unexpectedly (not due to any cause by you, like poor performance or insubordination or something) throw you into unemployment, possibly in a new location where you lack a professional network to find the next job, or where you would not choose to stay apart for the job you took, it shows a willingness on their part to earn your trust. It's extremely bizarre to me to hear someone characterize taking a new job by saying "I don't understand what the risk is." It's a huge, huge risk every time that the new place is going to treat you badly and that you could not have seen it ahead of time because they didn't emit red flags during the hiring process. And many ways of them erratically treating you badly results in you suddenly having no income or insurance and needing to figure out what to do -- a situation that should absolutely never be financed out of your personal savings (though, often it is because people rarely negotiate adequate severance). Perhaps you've been very lucky with working for good companies and just haven't experienced how prevalent this is.