2 ms·
Thats how they usually happen ? They are always "cold"
by dominotw 12d ago
Thats how they usually happen ? They are always "cold"
- DonHopkins 12d agoUnless you're C level, in which case you get promoted to "Vice President in Charge of Looking for a New Job" for a quarter.
- eterm 12d agoThis appears to be a UK new site*, and it's definitely not how they usually happen there. In fact, it's not even how they legally happen. > 100 or more redundancies - the consultation must start at least 45 days before any dismissals take effect https://www.gov.uk/redundancy-your-rights/consultation https://www.gov.uk/redundancy-your-rights/consultation If you want to have similar laws, you need to lobby your representatives, and get them to follow California's example, which introduced the Cal-WARN act: > “an employer may not order a mass layoff, relocation, or termination at a covered establishment unless, 60 days before the order takes effect, the employer gives written notice of the order” From https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/Cal-WARNAct.html https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/Cal-WARNAct.html But as others have said, it's not as strong as the UK laws, so it just becomes a de-facto notice period instead. It's still progress though. * Although not one I've ever heard of, which is a little suspicious.
- dcrazy 12d agoThere’s a federal WARN act too. Neither the state nor federal versions gives the employees any legal right to try to change the business’s mind.
- arccy 12d agoeven in the UK they still get announced as layoffs, employees get their access revoked, and they're in some sort of limbo while the consultations / process takes place.
- Scoring6931 12d agoIt seems to be a British article. For European standards, it's not only cold but would be absurdly illegal.
- dominotw 11d agoReally? Spotify did a layoff in sweden and they all got an email at 7 am and access cut off. None of them ever got reinstated.