4 ms·

Is less euphemistic language somehow better? If they said, "The economy is in bad shape, so we've decided we need to be spending less money right now. One way w

Is less euphemistic language somehow better? If they said, "The economy is in bad shape, so we've decided we need to be spending less money right now. One way we're going to do that is by laying people off. We're sorry, but we're a corporation and we have to make prudent business decisions even if they cause some people to suffer." would that make anybody who got laid off feel better?

coffeefirst 4y ago
Yes. This shows respect. If you have to do layoffs, the very least you can do is treat them like professionals and give good references.
jackmott42 4y ago
Plain language like that would be fantastically refreshing yes.
- ElevenLathe 4y ago
  Human beings understand this, which is why any manager with half a heart will translate to the plain language version instinctively after they're done reading the HR-prescribed spiel. HR is a profession whose purpose is to turn the process of hiring and employing human labor into a pantomime of financing and procuring capital goods or raw materials. Since their business is treating people like anything but people ("resources", contracts, "headcount", "cycles", etc.), this often slips their mind.
UmYeahNo 4y ago
Better? probably. Being honest with people is usually better. But this is a good time to remind everyone that you owe zero -- ZERO -- loyalty to a company. Be just as ruthless to them as they are to you. As an employee know that the company that employs you does not have your best interest in mind. They will dump you as soon as the asymmetry between what you provide to them vs. what they provide to you is no longer in their favor. I mean, it has to be that way, but you need to keep your eyes open to it. This is a very cynical view, but ultimately, the company couldn't care less about you. You are disposable, and will be disposed-of at the first opportunity it's called for. Remember that asymmetry can go the other way too. The very moment they are no longer providing high-value to you as an employer you can (and should) start searching for something better, where the asymmetry is more in your favor. You can ditch them just as quickly and easily as they ditch you.
- rot13xor 4y ago
  It's a good view to have. HR stands for human resources. The company views you the same way as a EC2 instance. They make layoff decisions the same way they spin down servers if their AWS bill gets too high.
  - charcircuit 4y ago
    People aren't identical and they take time to ramp up. You can't just fire someone and then later get back someone exactly as good.
    - disgruntledphd2 4y ago
      Sure, but if you only have cash for one person's wages, that's a cost you can eat in the future, when or if things improve.
- Invictus0 4y ago
  It's not cynical, it's business. The dishonesty always flows from corporation to employee.
- laserlight 4y ago
  I’m surprised by how and why people believe company statements claiming that there won’t be layoffs. Nothing can be a matter of belief in business. The company can either commit to a penalty in case there are layoffs or the statement effectively doesn’t exist.
marcosdumay 4y ago
Probably, and probably not enough to matter. What would really help is that the previous statement were in the form of "by policy, we never discuss the possibility of a layoff" instead of having a policy of lying while you prepare it.
athenot 4y ago
It's possible. I've been in a Fortune 100 company that did this. They explained the timeline too, with a deadline to accept a voluntary leave package, then a later date where those staying could be affected by layoffs. Being a large company, they were able to plan it in such a way as to encourage those close to retirement to leave, those who wanted to jump to go ahead and leave, and minimize the brain drain. They weren't running on a razor thin runway where ever day was bleading cash. Because one of the downsides of surprize layoff announcements, is that while many execs think they are just removing the lowest performing tier, what actually happens is the top performers who do have options see the writing on the wall and go ahead and jump elsewhere. Cost-cutting achieved but teams lobotomized and further decline ensues.

coffeefirst 4y ago

Yes. This shows respect. If you have to do layoffs, the very least you can do is treat them like professionals and give good references.

jackmott42 4y ago

Plain language like that would be fantastically refreshing yes.

ElevenLathe 4y ago
Human beings understand this, which is why any manager with half a heart will translate to the plain language version instinctively after they're done reading the HR-prescribed spiel. HR is a profession whose purpose is to turn the process of hiring and employing human labor into a pantomime of financing and procuring capital goods or raw materials. Since their business is treating people like anything but people ("resources", contracts, "headcount", "cycles", etc.), this often slips their mind.

UmYeahNo 4y ago

Better? probably. Being honest with people is usually better. But this is a good time to remind everyone that you owe zero -- ZERO -- loyalty to a company. Be just as ruthless to them as they are to you. As an employee know that the company that employs you does not have your best interest in mind. They will dump you as soon as the asymmetry between what you provide to them vs. what they provide to you is no longer in their favor. I mean, it has to be that way, but you need to keep your eyes open to it. This is a very cynical view, but ultimately, the company couldn't care less about you. You are disposable, and will be disposed-of at the first opportunity it's called for. Remember that asymmetry can go the other way too. The very moment they are no longer providing high-value to you as an employer you can (and should) start searching for something better, where the asymmetry is more in your favor. You can ditch them just as quickly and easily as they ditch you.

rot13xor 4y ago
It's a good view to have. HR stands for human resources. The company views you the same way as a EC2 instance. They make layoff decisions the same way they spin down servers if their AWS bill gets too high.
- charcircuit 4y ago
  People aren't identical and they take time to ramp up. You can't just fire someone and then later get back someone exactly as good.
  - disgruntledphd2 4y ago
    Sure, but if you only have cash for one person's wages, that's a cost you can eat in the future, when or if things improve.
Invictus0 4y ago
It's not cynical, it's business. The dishonesty always flows from corporation to employee.
laserlight 4y ago
I’m surprised by how and why people believe company statements claiming that there won’t be layoffs. Nothing can be a matter of belief in business. The company can either commit to a penalty in case there are layoffs or the statement effectively doesn’t exist.

marcosdumay 4y ago

Probably, and probably not enough to matter. What would really help is that the previous statement were in the form of "by policy, we never discuss the possibility of a layoff" instead of having a policy of lying while you prepare it.

athenot 4y ago

It's possible. I've been in a Fortune 100 company that did this. They explained the timeline too, with a deadline to accept a voluntary leave package, then a later date where those staying could be affected by layoffs. Being a large company, they were able to plan it in such a way as to encourage those close to retirement to leave, those who wanted to jump to go ahead and leave, and minimize the brain drain. They weren't running on a razor thin runway where ever day was bleading cash. Because one of the downsides of surprize layoff announcements, is that while many execs think they are just removing the lowest performing tier, what actually happens is the top performers who do have options see the writing on the wall and go ahead and jump elsewhere. Cost-cutting achieved but teams lobotomized and further decline ensues.