If it was underperformers who were cut for once, I say good on General Motors. We have too many of them as it is. I'm tired of seeing great people kicked to the curb just because their pay was higher than average and some number cruncher said they had to go. If this was one rare situation when cuts were deserved, I'll applaud the management for it.
12 replies (most recent on top)
Compared to what is now reported for those who will voluntarily part ways, it was an embarrassing package. I know a couple of the folks and am pretty sure it had more to do with their management, or lack thereof, than their skillsets and overall performance.
Just wondering if there was any compensation for those fired?
Working at General Motors is very bad for you! Get real job, not bad news. Leave soon. Very bad ignition switch troubles.
The guy on my team let go was hired 2 years ago. It's a roll of the dice if he showed up to a meeting, or finished his work for the sprint. It would take him hours to respond to emails, IMs. Good riddance.
No such thing as an under performer when you are under paid
I have seen management target older, higher paid employees and they go from exceeds on performance to partially meets. There is no recourse with HR as they work for management. They also then reduce an equal number of younger people to offset the older ones. Rinse and repeat.
Taken outside job with 40% raise and left gm. Am happy now.
I just submitted my whistleblowing note to the government after GM fired me for exposing an unethical practice that was run by an incompetent manager.
@xle+1lq6GF0O I guess you are retired.
You were probably unmarketable elsewhere.
I was rated low in behavior to stop me from applying inside jobs. I left company.
Meritocracy?
HEAVEN FORBID!!!
I would agree if I was convinced that the people fired were actual under-performers.
Were they? How do you know?
What metrics were used to determine "performance"?
Should under-performers at least be given the chance to improve? If not, management is ruling with fear, rather than encouragement.
And if "performance" is going to be used to determine worthiness, does the company benefit from bold thinking (innovation) or people that check boxes (uninspired, non-competitive products)?