5 ms·

Of course they are. Many, many companies offer a “voluntary first” incentive to avoid the bad press and services they might otherwise have to provide to laid-o

Of course they are. Many, many companies offer a “voluntary first” incentive to avoid the bad press and services they might otherwise have to provide to laid-off people. Jobs went away. Sugar-coating the exact method of ending the jobs doesn’t change that.

JackFr 8y ago
> Of course they are. Why? Because you say so? We should ignore the literal words of the press release in favor of something you think may happen? In fact, the structure of the the offer is one that offer's a far greater incentive to those with a lot of seniority vs those who are newer. If we assume that many of these might be technician jobs under a union contract where more years of service equals higher pay, they could have more senior workers take the package, immediately hire new employees and save a decent amount of money. Granted, I've only seen that strategy in practice with municipal workers, but it makes no more assumptions than you do.
- ceejayoz 8y ago
  > We should ignore the literal words of the press release As a general rule, this is a good idea.
- EpicEng 8y ago
  Are you familiar with the concept of PR?
Spivak 8y ago
I don't really see it as sugarcoating, this is way better than the alternative. They're giving their employees a generous heads up, offering an incentive to anyone who finds other employment, and people who really don't want to leave likely won't have to.
- erichurkman 8y ago
  And they get to structure who leaves and when. You can wind down projects responsibly, shift resources over time, train people on new tasks. Far less disruptive than a sudden layoff.
  - root_axis 8y ago
    Great point. This kind of arrangement assures that the exiting employee will be happy to cooperate with training their replacement in good faith.
root_axis 8y ago
Your cynicism seems misplaced; up to a year's salary as severance sounds like a pretty sweet sugar-coating to me. They didn't "avoid bad press", they simply didn't do anything to merit bad press. What's wrong with someone voluntarily choosing to take money in exchange for a resignation? It's not as if there is something inherently wrong with "jobs going away" when your definition includes people voluntarily quitting their job.
- RHSeeger 8y ago
  To be fair, it's not entirely resignation. It's "take this X and resign, or be put on the list to be fired and get something less than X". It's still better than just being layed off, but it not as nice as a voluntary resignation.
  - root_axis 8y ago
    The company solicited for volunteers, they didn't target individuals and give them an ultimatum.

JackFr 8y ago

> Of course they are. Why? Because you say so? We should ignore the literal words of the press release in favor of something you think may happen? In fact, the structure of the the offer is one that offer's a far greater incentive to those with a lot of seniority vs those who are newer. If we assume that many of these might be technician jobs under a union contract where more years of service equals higher pay, they could have more senior workers take the package, immediately hire new employees and save a decent amount of money. Granted, I've only seen that strategy in practice with municipal workers, but it makes no more assumptions than you do.

ceejayoz 8y ago
> We should ignore the literal words of the press release As a general rule, this is a good idea.
EpicEng 8y ago
Are you familiar with the concept of PR?

Spivak 8y ago

I don't really see it as sugarcoating, this is way better than the alternative. They're giving their employees a generous heads up, offering an incentive to anyone who finds other employment, and people who really don't want to leave likely won't have to.

erichurkman 8y ago
And they get to structure who leaves and when. You can wind down projects responsibly, shift resources over time, train people on new tasks. Far less disruptive than a sudden layoff.
- root_axis 8y ago
  Great point. This kind of arrangement assures that the exiting employee will be happy to cooperate with training their replacement in good faith.

root_axis 8y ago

Your cynicism seems misplaced; up to a year's salary as severance sounds like a pretty sweet sugar-coating to me. They didn't "avoid bad press", they simply didn't do anything to merit bad press. What's wrong with someone voluntarily choosing to take money in exchange for a resignation? It's not as if there is something inherently wrong with "jobs going away" when your definition includes people voluntarily quitting their job.

RHSeeger 8y ago
To be fair, it's not entirely resignation. It's "take this X and resign, or be put on the list to be fired and get something less than X". It's still better than just being layed off, but it not as nice as a voluntary resignation.
- root_axis 8y ago
  The company solicited for volunteers, they didn't target individuals and give them an ultimatum.