I had target on my back since I went on parental leave. They laid me off stating AI restructuring. I see that they posted th1e same role including title 6 months later within same state another site. I do not have documentation on anything other than the final lay off zoom call. My manager made multiple comments during my tenure about my parental leave. I already moved on from this place. 3 extra resources were hired before I was let go to replace what I was doing. I smart enough to catch on to it and the resources are d-mb enough to not understand any training. Is there anything that I can do?
15 replies (most recent on top)
Just like many other people, I've witnessed jobs/roles get posted in as little as only 2 weeks AFTER the Laidoff employees' last day based on the WARN period.
For example, if it's a 90 day WARN based on the U.S. State and the employee was laid off on January 1, their last day "at work", non-working period is March 31.
But their same exact job/role was posted on Workday 2 weeks later. Could be 2-6 months later, it doesn't matter.
This shows it was actually a Firing due to performance issues or some other reasons, and it was only a courtesy layoff.
A courtesy layoff in some cases because it involves MDs/Directors who receive severance so that Citi absolves itself from future lawsuits from the laidoff employees and/or to mitigate bad blood.
Some although Not all, MDs/Directors are well-known in the industry or on Wall Street and laying off/firing said MDs/Directors makes Citi or whomever employer took bad. Optically it looks like the laidoff employees agreed to and voluntarily accepted the layoff Divorce by accepting severance money.
But we all know Both insiders and outsiders know the true real backstories of why the left their jobs. They were forced out !
From my experience, anyone with a special circumstance like being on parental leave was given MORE protection from actions as to be blunt we knew it would be easier for them to have a case, or even if they didn't it was costly for us to defend in court. This was true for anywhere in the world. Each state has different laws, but Citi isn't stupid - they're not going to post the exact same role and incur a lawsuit. So likely there is a period of time (depends on country / state) that must pass before you can fulfil the position in the same location, this length of time is longer in the UK/EU than anywhere else. If you took severance then without a doubt you signed away your right to take any action - otherwise you'll have to pay it all back, part of the severance is not only for you but essentially for a company to buy themselves protection from you taking legal action in the future (everyone does it, very common).
The whole team remained other than me. Mind you those existing folks do way less than I do. The job wasn't moved to a low cost location. It was within same state and same pay range
@ep
It still doesn't hurt for the OP to talk to an employment lawyer to see what his/her options and rights are.
If filing a lawsuit means the OP must give back the severance, then the OP must consider that within the context of how much more money the OP can get from the lawsuit.
On the news: Kathleen Martin filed a lawsuit against COO Anand Selva because she was fired for refusing to Lie to Regulators about Citi's Data problems.
She did Not accept or take the severance, but received a sizable settlement.
@OP If you took the severance probably not. That is how they win.
Not correct. If the OP's job was re-posted for a different location, this still means Citi Fired the OP under the pretense of a "Layoff" because Citi re-posted the OP's same exact job, title, job description, duties etc. but Citi probably wants to hire in a low cost location.
So it wasn't a Layoff. It was a firing.
Regardless. The OP can still talk to an employee-sude parental discrimination lawyer.
@cb Men can take parental leave. Not just pregnant women.
If it moved to another location then its not yours. Were you the only person in Citi who did this job?
F&ck citi and Jane…they all are POS
My performance was consistently 3, I have been at citi for more than 3 years
The other posters must be HR trying to dissuade you from at least looking into what your rights, recourse, redress and options are by talking to a pregnancy discrimination lawyer.
If your job performance Ratings were 3s or higher BEFORE you were Laidoff, this shows you were Not fired for bad performance under the pretense of "Layoff".
You were Fired as a protected class because of familial/family reasons. This is part of the broad term of employee discrimination.
Again, you need to talk to a pregnancy discrimination lawyer.
I can tell you now that it probably will not matter. However, I can also confirm that the layoffs appear to be based on a combination of performance and tenure. I know many employees who have taken pregnancy or parental leave, so I do not believe that was the reason.
In our department, the layoffs were also used to remove problem employees, including low performers and people who were simply coasting. Since they are rehiring for your position only six months later, it sounds more likely that your layoff was performance-related.
You can Google and contact a pregnancy discrimination lawyer.
Move on if you haven't already. There is no point in having a grudge against these corps. In the off chance that you have documentation to sc--w them with, it takes too long and is too cumbersome. It's better to get a job elsewhere