Rising Star
Related Posts
Hey! Any Google folks know if it’s possible to negotiate fully remote if a contract role is hybrid? Personally, I don’t want to relocate and go to the office on a contract role given the current economy. Plus, I’m assuming contractors are the first to go in layoffs. I just think it’s a fair trade off if I’d be allowed to work fully remote. I’m also trying to have flexibility to manage my Airbnb business in a different country. Same time zone as the home office if I’d travel weeks at a time.
Who’s negotiated severance? Any tips?
Bowl Leader
Any word on layoffs at JPM?
Rising Star
Johnson & Johnson Is there any news on pharma giant layoffs and freeze-hiring? AbbVie Biogen Bristol Myers Squibb Eli Lilly and Company Gilead Sciences Johnson & Johnson Intellia Therapeutics, Inc Pfizer Novo Nordisk Merck Roche Regeneron Merck Teva Pharmaceuticals
More Posts
How does the project pipeline looks like for TC?
Hey! Any Google folks know if it’s possible to negotiate fully remote if a contract role is hybrid? Personally, I don’t want to relocate and go to the office on a contract role given the current economy. Plus, I’m assuming contractors are the first to go in layoffs. I just think it’s a fair trade off if I’d be allowed to work fully remote. I’m also trying to have flexibility to manage my Airbnb business in a different country. Same time zone as the home office if I’d travel weeks at a time.
Chief
Enthusiast
2/4 Thread (General):
Conversation Starter
I’m exhausted from interviewing and caseing 🥵
Additional Posts in Human Resources
Are you in a toxic environment?
Pro
New to Fishbowl?
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Have the reasoning and be concise if you are going to talk about it. Nothing is worse than trying to overexplain to somebody who is losing their job.
I’d rather it be short and sweet. I worry the person might start to get the wrong idea, and then it’s even more of an emotional roller coaster.
I consider it redundancy. If you are eliminating a role, then it is a role that no longer is needed to reach the company’s goals. Goals change and evolve. It may be improved efficiencies or reorganizing skills that drove the layoff. It’s not always that a company is performing poorly that there are layoffs. It’s that the goals changed.
Chief
to Global Leadership Program 1 -- yes, this! Years ago, my husband was hired by Honeywell as a sales rep for their industrial automation division. They moved us to CLEVELAND in the early 80's, when the entire country but especially Cleveland was in a huge recession. It took me five months to find a job out there. Six months after we moved there, they laid him off -- they laid off the entire sales force and decided to go with manufacturers' reps. So they didn't know merely six months prior that they were going to jettison the entire sales staff???
Oh, and AFTER he was let go, they sent him a letter congratulating him for performing so well that he made President's Club.
We never bought any Honeywell residential stuff since.
Chief
I'd like to know the answer to that, since I was laid off, along with about 1,000 other employees nationwide, by a company that had enjoyed record high profits. In the height of the Great Recession, they put 1,000 people on the street and there were no jobs. I got incredibly lucky that I found a temp HRBP job that bridged me to my next job, but I doubt many of the other 1,000 were that lucky.
And this should abso-freaking-lutely NOT be HR's job to explain the business rationale. That's the leadership's job.
Employees almost always know that the reason for the layoffs is not the reason the company keeps trying to push. The best advice I have is to not pretend that the employee being laid off is stupid.
Rising Star
Trur
I've always been in the position of repeating whatever the company line is. It's usually something about a challenging business environment and changes being made and necessary reorganization.
Chief
And every employee with two brain cells to rub together sees the utter BS of such statements.
Because they are not “doing well.” They are moving $$ off the books in order to keep afloat. That’s not market driven, organic profit - that’s an attempt to preserve profit by removing “overhead” while trying to not scare away the remaining employees who are needed to deliver services etc. don’t be fooled. HR usually has to layoff employees and then get their own severance once everyone is gone. Leaders who pull this move are incompetent and out of integrity.
I would comment/ask - what do you mean when you say "How do YOU justify layoffs"? Are you asking for advice on how you, literally the poster of this question, justifies it? Or are you asking a more generic - "how does the company justify it"? YOU, the individual, should never justify it. Even though HR is used by most companies primarily as a cover-your-ass (cya) tool - even in the best of times - you NEVER want the responsibility of having to explain a layoff. If you are asked to be present and/or "handle" layoffs, you simply repeat the script that legal and/or senior leaders create. Now in some organizations HR senior leaders or specialists like labor relations peeps, will get involved in crafting "the message". Even then, it's on the business leaders/owners to give final approval to the language.
If you're talking about, how do you explain it to the employees that are left - again, that's not your job. If asked by business leaders to talk to remaining employees, say no. That's what a leader does. If forced, you repeat what the company drafted. You do not answer questions, and you do not say anything more or less or different than the approved script. If you're in a smaller company and/or bad company and they do not provide you with that script, you say no. If they still force you, draft something up and send to as many senior leaders as you can safely before saying a word to employees. You do not want the responsibility, or the grief, of having to both defend the decision as well as come up with the rationale itself, let alone legal consequences.
This is narrative control, effectively toeing the company line, using the terminology and talking points to defend and align actions with business strategy for the change.
I’m not often justifying it as the decision has been made and HR is normally the face of that change. You’ll also get mild to wild reactions from employees (understandably), and this often is what helps me rationalize the decisions.
Either they’re very professional, skilled and likely to easily find work; or other times their behaviour speaks for itself as to why they’re selected.
Rising Star
Totaly agreed with you.
They can justify layoffs and typically they have a business plan that support that. They may shut down one group, region, or job classification to support the new business plan. Many times they will reinvest in a new product line which requires hiring for those specific positions. The terminated employees can apply for those positions and many times they are given a higher preference over outside candidates. Typically companies have a rehire plan guidelines that supports this.
The justification -- for your own understanding -- is that whilst the current situ may be good, they can see the troubling headwinds coming.
If things were all good, they wouldn't be making the layoffs so you have to somewhat trust what's going on.
Your job is not to over explain and get into economics with the individuals, very sadly, it is what it is
Chief
What they see in the future is lower bonuses for the CEO. Layoffs are done when profits dip, not when losses start.
This exact situation recently happened to me
I couldn’t do anything about it. What exactly do you mean? My role was “eliminated” along with 4 others.
That is a great question because it does happen. HR should be present at the decision-making table to provide alternative suggestions and ask questions. Yet, in the event that this is not the case, HR must communicate with utmost transparency, empathy, and clarity to maintain trust when a healthy company conducts layoffs. Concentrate on strategic restructuring, including the incorporation of AI, the shifting of priorities, or the overhiring of employees, rather than financial distress. The message must be conveyed by the leadership, who must assume full accountability and provide generous severance to demonstrate that the departing employees are valued.
Ive been in many of those rooms as well. My strategy is keep it short and sweet.
I don’t see that as a contraction. Layoffs when the company is doing well does not automatically mean that they should not happen if it is in the long term interests of the company to do them. Long term the company needs to remain efficient and continue doing well, if layoffs are needed for that we should be at the table advocating for them to happen for the overall success of the company and the people it employs.