3 ms·
Agreed. My best friend works at Cargill, and they're doing the same thing. They get around the "outsourcing" rule by creating a Cargill office in India and th
by at-fates-hands 11y ago
Agreed.
My best friend works at Cargill, and they're doing the same thing.
They get around the "outsourcing" rule by creating a Cargill office in India and then sending all the "business" to those offices instead of here. It's semantics, but its still outsourcing any way you look at it.
She's heartbroken because she's in the process of finalizing people's year-end reviews who are going to be laid off within the next few months. Cargill also makes it a policy you have to train your replacement or else you lose your severance. So here she is, writing up year end reviews that have no value at all, while training a new team that will replace her entire team here in in the US.
Not cool, not cool at all.
- gambiting 11y agoThe only way out of this is for everyone to stand up and say they won't train their replacements, even if it means losing their severance. That's the only way. Sounds like....unions?
- s73v3r 11y agoHow about we simply outlaw any conditions on severance?
- pyrophane 11y agoBecause companies have no obligation to provide severance, they often offer it as part of a larger exit agreement that contains other terms. This really limits the laid off employee's ability to negotiate because the company can basically say "take it or leave it" since they know how valuable severance is to someone in that situation. That is how they get away of forcing people to sign non-disparagement agreements and to give up their right to sue.