Does anyone truly know who makes the surplus determinations as far as which people in groups? Is it HR, AVP, Director, combination of people, etc?
11 replies (most recent on top)
That would be too obvious. Age years of service salary and ranking. Pension eligibility is deduced Watson. Kiss a– if you want to work.
anybody that doesn't believe they want to get the pension off the books and isn't a factor is in dreamland. they don't want the pension and are trying to dump as fast as they can.
T is actually a laggard; most other firms froze pension accruals in the late 90s.
If the pension assets under-perform expectations, then the company is on the hook to fill the gap. And that will tend to happen when economic conditions are at their worst. Which is why all companies are so keen to sc-ap pensions.
Only Randy is allowed to be in the pension books and thats a 200K+ per month
anybody that doesn't believe they want to get the pension off the books and isn't a factor is in dreamland. they don't want the pension and are trying to dump as fast as they can.
look at the lawsuit they aren't updating the information to keep money away from people on the buyout. so randy steals from his employees and get rewarded. hey but india got a lot a jobs good job randy.
"The whole stacked rankings template was created to enforce the nepotism in the first place. Everyone ranked lower is not in "the club" and at risk."
This is true - all the relatives and buddies get the work you were hired to do and then when they can't do it they call you. this is not how other companies work they give you work that you are paid to do.
The whole stacked rankings template was created to enforce the nepotism in the first place. Everyone ranked lower is not in "the club" and at risk.
The stack rank template is meant to prevent that from happening. There are 7-10 categories that were centered around performance & Time in title was a big one, longer term employees scored higher ( meaning less likely to be layed off....) than newer employees. What I always found ridiculous was top mgmt focus on eNPS, the vast majority of negative scores sited job security as #1 concern, yet the top down cuts just continued...
Basically the vp/avp/director checks the list to get their friends and family out of the surplus.
I’m a retired 4th line and unfortunately I had to go thru this drill way too many times. Pension eligible was not part of the stack ranking. I did have people who were pension eligible who would volunteer to be layed off so they could receive severance package.
Any truth to targeting pension eligible?
Finance sets macro target, HR allocates the reductions to the SVP and they decide whether to apply evenly across their org or target certain groups. The vp/avp/director receives the top down target and template to stack rank their employees. This information is compiled within a generally short period of time (eg 1-2 days) and submitted back up the line and over to HR.