I got a list of people based on age and pay rank of who was eliminated. If there were multiple people on a team let go, but not everyone, does that mean they actually assessed our skills and let us go based on that factor?
8 replies (most recent on top)
Here's some interesting insight a friend in HR once shared with me.
The first pass of who to cut, where, etc. Is based on a very sophisticated computer software program developed for 3M after it got sued after mcnerney for age discrimination. It has been updated many times since. A computer program picks out the candidates based on age, performance ranking, gender, race, location, business, salary, etc. They usually have a run to "nominate" 25 percent more than planned layoff. So for these 6000 cuts that means 1st pass some 7500 have been put on the zhit list.
This makes it easier for those 2 or 3 levels above the soon to be fired employees to sift through the list and pick out the 6000 losers and then "save" the 1500 who don't get canned this round.
There is no more thought than this put into the process and it's been staple since Inge. It sucks to be canned but it isn't "personal" where your boss fires you because you don't kiss bu-t enough.
Age is only listed because that is what the law requires. 3M isn't doing it out of the goodness of their hearts.
Only favoritism. If you are your manager’s favorite then only you are safe no matter how capable employee you are ..
Why is only age listed? With woke 3M, there are much larger dei plays than age!!!! I love diversity and am married into it but i don’t support automatically losing excellent talent bc of some woke goals. It makes me frustrated to see dei workers fast tracked to director to meet a goal but it makes me SICK to see this play out with layoffs. I support freedom of expression but just because I ain’t full of expression shouldn’t mean I’m on the fast track to being cut.
Skills were only assessed after demographic requirements were met. Given the multiple demographic requirements, that usually does not leave much room for skills/talent/contributions to matter much.
Those given the highest ranking were probably safe. After that, age and demographics rule the day, not whether you got an average or below average ranking. And yes, higher salary with an average ranking makes you top of the list.
This is why the boss who has to fire the employee is given a name or names and was not asked to ante up a name. That has been the M.O. since Inge.
Incompetent people are the last to realize it.
Wishful thinking. I think it's based on demographics, in such a way to limit lawsuits, then pick the highest salary. It'd be the exception where people are selected based on performance factors or redundancy.