5 ms·

I want a new US law that will incriminate managers of public companies when they publicly lie about upcoming layoffs. The typical “there is no plan for layoffs

I want a new US law that will incriminate managers of public companies when they publicly lie about upcoming layoffs. The typical “there is no plan for layoffs at this time”. This is lying to the investors about the status of the company, lying to the employees who keep on with their lives while they should be looking for new options. This is pure fraud.

throwoutway 4y ago
What’s the alternative? It will just turn into the glomar response (we can neither confirm nor deny) Though I agree lying is wrong
- whatever1 4y ago
  The European way? Announce it months in advance (which is when it was decided anyway) that you are in the process of layoffs and align with both investors and employees about the plan.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    Well in the US if you have more than 200 employees, you do have provide 90 days notice / severance for mass layoffs under the WARN act so.....
    - whatever1 4y ago
      That is if you call them layoffs. A big co announced to its employees 2 weeks before their assessment that the percentage of employees that will need “improvement” increased from 3% to 10%, and that this year they will offer in lieu payments for those who do not want to do the “improvement program”. So there you go, 10% with 2 weeks notice.
      - derwiki 4y ago
        That sounds like 2 weeks PIPing notice, but how long were they on PIP before being terminated?
        whatever1 4y ago
        Virtually everyone got the in lieu payment after being discouraged by the direct management to pursue the improvement. They immediately left. The improvement was a two month program.
      - phpisthebest 4y ago
        Your wording is very odd, but if I understand correctly the company announced it would be putting 10% of employee's on an improvement plan, with your belief the goal being termination, and they offered buy out options of employees would voluntary separate? If so, then that is not a layoff, and it often a common practice to avoid layoff, people already on the fence, close to retirement, etc will take the buyout. I fail see what the issue is here....
- TremendousJudge 4y ago
  Yes, actually. I find silence (or evasives) to be better than outright lies. It gives space to read between the lines.
  - dominotw 4y ago
    not really because you will get the same response even if there arent any layoffs for real.
adrr 4y ago
There are penalties for making false statements to investors, which can include SEC coming down on you or an investor lawsuit. Statements made represent what we know at that time. Things have changed from January till now. Consumer sentiment is in the gutter and we don't know when the interest rates hikes will stop. Interest rates have a huge impact on public companies due the debt public companies carry. What you're seeing is the tightening of cash flow. Companies are cutting back on expenses. This has a huge impact downstream. I would hate to be at a SaaS company because new implementations are getting pulled and deal flow has dried up. Some of these companies are public. What they knew two months ago and what they know are completely different. My biggest annoyance is that a bunch of large public companies did stock buybacks when the market was at record highs. Now that debt is expensive, doing secondary offerings just completes the buy high sell low scenario and shows bad leadership.
xedrac 4y ago
My red flag goes up immediately as soon as any manager, or executive, starts making claims about no layoffs. The least they can do is provide enough severance that you have ample time to find something new without worrying about money.
dominotw 4y ago
wouldn't that simply turn into " we are not allowed to talk about layoffs" standard response. how is this helpful.

throwoutway 4y ago

What’s the alternative? It will just turn into the glomar response (we can neither confirm nor deny) Though I agree lying is wrong

whatever1 4y ago
The European way? Announce it months in advance (which is when it was decided anyway) that you are in the process of layoffs and align with both investors and employees about the plan.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  Well in the US if you have more than 200 employees, you do have provide 90 days notice / severance for mass layoffs under the WARN act so.....
  - whatever1 4y ago
    That is if you call them layoffs. A big co announced to its employees 2 weeks before their assessment that the percentage of employees that will need “improvement” increased from 3% to 10%, and that this year they will offer in lieu payments for those who do not want to do the “improvement program”. So there you go, 10% with 2 weeks notice.
    - derwiki 4y ago
      That sounds like 2 weeks PIPing notice, but how long were they on PIP before being terminated?
      - whatever1 4y ago
        Virtually everyone got the in lieu payment after being discouraged by the direct management to pursue the improvement. They immediately left. The improvement was a two month program.
    - phpisthebest 4y ago
      Your wording is very odd, but if I understand correctly the company announced it would be putting 10% of employee's on an improvement plan, with your belief the goal being termination, and they offered buy out options of employees would voluntary separate? If so, then that is not a layoff, and it often a common practice to avoid layoff, people already on the fence, close to retirement, etc will take the buyout. I fail see what the issue is here....
TremendousJudge 4y ago
Yes, actually. I find silence (or evasives) to be better than outright lies. It gives space to read between the lines.
- dominotw 4y ago
  not really because you will get the same response even if there arent any layoffs for real.

adrr 4y ago

There are penalties for making false statements to investors, which can include SEC coming down on you or an investor lawsuit. Statements made represent what we know at that time. Things have changed from January till now. Consumer sentiment is in the gutter and we don't know when the interest rates hikes will stop. Interest rates have a huge impact on public companies due the debt public companies carry. What you're seeing is the tightening of cash flow. Companies are cutting back on expenses. This has a huge impact downstream. I would hate to be at a SaaS company because new implementations are getting pulled and deal flow has dried up. Some of these companies are public. What they knew two months ago and what they know are completely different. My biggest annoyance is that a bunch of large public companies did stock buybacks when the market was at record highs. Now that debt is expensive, doing secondary offerings just completes the buy high sell low scenario and shows bad leadership.

xedrac 4y ago

My red flag goes up immediately as soon as any manager, or executive, starts making claims about no layoffs. The least they can do is provide enough severance that you have ample time to find something new without worrying about money.

dominotw 4y ago

wouldn't that simply turn into " we are not allowed to talk about layoffs" standard response. how is this helpful.