Thread regarding Optum layoffs

I can't figure out the criteria

I've made it through at least six layoffs now, and all of them left me scratching my head. All the rounds didn't seem to follow any obvious pattern. There were people with years of experience who disappeared, while others I expected to be vulnerable stayed. But then again, some of the newbies were also gone. Different pays, different statuses, different ratings... No common ground whatsoever.


by
| 89 views | | 16 replies (last 1 day ago) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1m2q7q1re

16 replies (most recent on top)

@11h people like you are intimidating to sr leaders.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @18b+1m2q7q1re

I was laid off because I was paid significantly more than my peers. That's what experience and longevity gets you!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @11h+1m2q7q1re

For most, they just ended up under incompetent leadership who mismanaged their talents and couldn't utilize their potential properly.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ye+1m2q7q1re

In UHC Tech especially MnR/MA/EI the best are let go. They only want to keep average boot li---rs that won't question anything and follow instructions

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @x6+1m2q7q1re

I got a new manager shortly before I was let go and even though I was with the team and new the application for over a decade, they felt they knew better. I honestly feel that I was let go because I wasn't a "yes" man and would tell it like it was. Joke was on them, they lost multiple people, people who were very knowledgeable shortly after I was let go. Now they have to answer for themselves and are realizing they don't have the answers. I am calling it Karma. Meanwhile, I am at a new place and moving forward with my life.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wv+1m2q7q1re

Don’t forget age. If you’re 40 and up you’re on a list.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @sq+1m2q7q1re

@bn must be the claims department!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @g4+1m2q7q1re

Clearly with the amount of off shore, it is financially driven. If you make more than the next 2 folks, you have a target. Quickest way to financial stability is cutting higher earners.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @g2+1m2q7q1re

I was management at Optum for 20 years before my number finally came up. I was never given any criteria for laying people off, only a quota. I would always select either the lowest performers or emps I knew wanted to leave and would like the severance. When my turn to be cut came I knew it was coming because I had a new Senior Director that I was not getting along with.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fq+1m2q7q1re

@OP In my area nepotism is high. Family and friends are safe.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bn+1m2q7q1re

Basic things to look for outside of obvious ones like unlikeable/ bad reviews/drama:

  • Workload if you're the team *itch for dumping work on you'll be okay
  • Pay relative to team which most people won't ever know but lots of people are very underpaid (if youre like 90k+ at a 26-28) you're probably at the higher end of pay and will be targeted
  • Team size (larger teams ripe for cuts 4+ I'd worry)
by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ay+1m2q7q1re

Sometimes it's just $$

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @av+1m2q7q1re

You cannot and will not figure it out. The principal is simple: strictly follow financial sense, avoid triggering WARN or any/all/possible federal/state regulations, mitigate legal liability as much as possible, and minimize disruption to operations. Low level management figures out numbers and names.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @at+1m2q7q1re

It’s people management doesn’t like for many different reasons. Usually backstabbing and made up stories from co workers that are jealous and are underachievers.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @as+1m2q7q1re

I know a few
You do your job well
You are underpaid
You don’t challenge management
You play well in the sand box
You are just lucky
Could be one or a combo of these.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ah+1m2q7q1re

@OP seems like they’re just drawing names out of a hat. That’s par for the course… all they care about is the bottom line anyway, we’re all just numbers

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ab+1m2q7q1re

Post a reply

: