3 ms·
Not every employee who loses their job does because they performed poorly. There are lots of situations (especially at startups that are evolving rapidly) where
by tomkarlo 13y ago
Not every employee who loses their job does because they performed poorly. There are lots of situations (especially at startups that are evolving rapidly) where you might hire someone to do a job that is no longer necessary, or has been made obsolete as your operation evolves.
Also, paying severance isn't just about doing the right thing for the departing employee. It's also about ensuring that your other employees feel good about their own jobs and don't have to worry that one day, they might be left in the cold with no cushion to help cover the search for a job (which will likely take far longer than the severance covers.)
- rrwhite 13y agoIn this context the original discussion revolved around someone being fired for cause (extremely poor performance). That someone was a knowledge worker and fairly well compensated. There was also little reason to believe that person wouldn't have a new job by the time they walked out the door (job market being what it is). Thus my goal was to argue for a reason why you should always pay severance even when none of those conditions you mentioned apply. Otherwise I agree with everything you wrote.
- tomkarlo 13y agoEven poor performance is the fault of both the company and the employee to some degree... unless something changed, the company hired them for something they weren't suited to do, or failed to develop them properly. And generally, other employees don't know exactly how much someone underperformed, so it's moot from their standpoint. The fact they were "fairly well compensated" is irrelevant, by the way. Severance isn't paid because people were underpaid.