Why didn't the bank offer a voluntary option before layoffs? Judging by this forum, there would be more than enough people for whatever number they have in mind. That would spare some people a mountain of pain and make others extremely happy. Why not go that route?
5 replies (most recent on top)
Are you serious? EVERYBODY who qualifies for the year of severance looks at this like a dream break for a year.
- allowing people to volunteer for layoffs would exhibit a loss of control by management. Management wants to remain in control at all times.
- management is afraid too many people would volunteer. What would we do if 20% of the population volunteers?
- a volunteer program would not get much media attention, but a forced large scale layoff will, bringing notice that management is serious about corporate performance. That in itself can increase share price.
I know I will get downvoted for my responses, but just laying it out as I see it.
If the bank had morales as they claim, they would not only ask for voluntary layoffs, but also look to place you other positions if your jobs being eliminated.
And the one poster is correct… Losing your job is not fun, however, for those that have been with the bank long enough, that will get a year severance… I get it. They would get out of this place and some time off to refocus, recharge, and look for something better.
Nobody should want to get laid off. Being without a job is tough.