Help me understand how 1 team lays off one employee and then pulls another employee from a different team to fill a position on the team they just laid someone off on? Couldn't they have transferred the employee they just laid off?
7 replies (most recent on top)
@aj Why Charlotte? There’s a hub there but it’s not HQ.
@OP yes, they could but if they could get rid of the one that su-ks for that jobs, it’s 2 birds one stone.
I’d volunteer for severance.
Most likely this happened.
Someone at L4 level was assigned a task to reduce X dollars in expense. The only way usually is compensation. If they don't have an empty seat to give up (someone quit prior, or an open job position not filled yet), someone gets the axe.
Assuming both teams mentioned roll up to the same cost center for that L4... the L4 knew this person was low quality. L4 lays off that person. The target person's manager has to notify the target.
As for the work, L4 knows that team has some important work and moves someone over to the place the target person was sitting.
At the end of the day, the expense for compensation is still lower by X dollars, one less team member overall, in the long run of course. Short term, bigger financial hit for severance.
L4 can tell their leader at L2 or L3 "task has been completed".
Most managers, unless they are FORCED to target remote people, will just select the weakest link (based on what a lower level manager told them).
Someone in power didn't like the person who was laid off. Or the person who replaced them was someone well thought of but wasn't in a good role previously. Who knows.
More likely is the laid off person was remote and the replacement was in Charlotte.
Because clearly the person laid off was either not working out or they found someone cheaper.
This falls under the umbrella of life is not fair