used to be that your email address disappeared from the system immediately and you disappeared from the directory within 24 hours.
now it looks like people stay active in the system for a month or longer. what gives?
22 replies (most recent on top)
"During that time I could apply for other jobs - but my access to the SAS network and to my SAS email - was terminated."
This seems to have been the case "forever" and I always thought this was kind of odd. You can't see the internal job listings and have little chance of networking to find a job.
I'm very sorry for what happened. I still don't get how or why BH did not face discipline for his "send-off". Or maybe he got a slap on the wrist, but why was he not made to apologize, I wonder. Probably because HR just wanted it to go away fast.
Does signing the severance agreement mean you cease to be eligible for other jobs within SAS? Or, is there a clause that says if you find another position at SAS within 30 days the severance is null and void?
When I was laid off back in July - I was notified on July 14th, but told that I would continue on the payroll for 30 days until August 14th. During that time I could apply for other jobs - but my access to the SAS network and to my SAS email - was terminated.
SAS is a great company to work for until you are being laid off, among testers being laid off in July, two of them were on FMLA, the HR rep said it has nothing to do with the individuals, it's a companywide decision.
Don't ever feel "embarrassment" or "stigma".
The company was managed in such a way that it now requires layoffs. That has nothing to do with you. It's on them.
It’s really difficult to fully comprehend being laid off, unexpectedly, as a long-time SAS employee - the embarrassment with your peers, the stigma of being laid off by the company “that doesn’t lay off”, the knowledge that the possibility of finding another job is slim, that your career is finished when you have more to give.
It’s easy to say it’s just business, be all noble about how you would be sad but move on - it’s quite another thing to actually go through it
"Disagree that laying people off after years of service is cruel - actually, it's just business. And, they got fantastic severance. Read r/layoff (Reddit) and you'll get a better understanding."
You might have to be in your 50's and worked at SAS your entire career to understand why it seems cruel.
For the most part, SAS was always more than "just business".
And witnessing the impact on my mid-50's co-worker with 25+ years at SAS (a good, dedicated employee) being forced to scramble and retrain and try to find a new job at that age.
But, I concede your point that SAS has been better than most, including the severance paid when they do lay off.
I am at the same point as you ( and also grateful). A VRBP would be a win-win for us and for SAS. Otherwise there is no incentive for us to anything other than to stay employed, which keeps the headcount high.
Agree about the part regarding BH's handling - despicable. And I hope you found a way to provide anonymous feedback on that - I know that myself and others did.
Disagree that laying people off after years of service is cruel - actually, it's just business. And, they got fantastic severance. Read r/layoff (Reddit) and you'll get a better understanding.
Even if I get laid off at SAS tomorrow, I'll always be grateful for a very nice career. I've been treated very well. And I've just hit the point where getting another job wouldn't be absolutely essential, so all that pressure is gone.
But to layoff folks in their late-40's, early/mid-50's, who have put 25+ solid years in at SAS, is just cruel. Every case I know of was not a case of the person refusing to learn new things - that was simply a gross thing for BH to say in front of other employees. One of the very few times I've been extremely disappointed in SAS leadership.
@2hjv+1rlJIRvs “I could have easily said this a year ago, but not now - would it seem quite so stable if you are laid off tomorrow?”
If I got laid off tomorrow then it would completely su-k. I would be angry, sad, lots of things. But I would not rewrite history and say that a company I was at for 25 years had been anything other than incredibly stable for my family and I.
I think that what bothers most people, including me, is the victim blaming and obvious gaslighting that went on after the tester layoff. If they had said that the testers were laid off because of cost (which is the obvious motive here) I think that everyone would have said that su-ked and moved on.
“I get the sentiment. But if someone has been employed there 5, 10, 15, 30 years then it is far more than just feeling that way. Getting layed off at that point doesn’t change the fact that it was/is an extremely stable place.”
I could have easily said this a year ago, but not now - would it seem quite so stable if you are laid off tomorrow?
@1vin+1rlJIRvs “It feels that way, until it doesn’t”
I get the sentiment. But if someone has been employed there 5, 10, 15, 30 years then it is far more than just feeling that way. Getting layed off at that point doesn’t change the fact that it was/is an extremely stable place.
It's the valuing part that is disingenuous. It's a culture where the only way to the top is by trampling on those seen to be beneath you and taking credit for your hard work like it's their own. It's way more toxic than people realize, but it's easy to be gaslit into thinking things couldn't be better anywhere else by the folks who are in the right pockets. I think people were valued a decade ago. 56
“One thing that has been pretty constant across the board is relative employment stability”
It feels that way, until it doesn’t
Like others, I was disenchanted with the way the tester layoffs went down last summer. But, JM was right. A few job elims here and there is really minor in the scheme of things, especially given revenue has been flat for as long as it has. You sound like someone who has either been at SAS their entire career or someone who doesn't understand the current Tech climate very well. SAS is exceptional in the way JM described, whether it be because they really do value people or because JG doesn't want to be in the news for layoffs.
Consider headlines such as this, "Google Lays Off Thousands More Employees Despite Record Profits One Year After Laying off 12,000 Employees" - SAS was never that. I still feel fortunate to be there as my career winds down. I'm sorry not everyone has it as good as I do there, and it hasn't always been that way for me. One thing that has been pretty constant sctoss the board is relative employment stability.
Oh, gosh, you could not pay me to have that person's job.
@1enj+1rlJIRvs
"As she [JM] spoke about other companies investing in too many people and spending too much, then having to lay them off, and how SAS didn't really do layoffs, her chest got redder and redder."
Did her nose get longer, and longer, too?
JM spoke at the analyst conference this week. She waxed poetic about how different SAS is when it comes to people and valuing them. As she spoke about other companies investing in too many people and spending too much, then having to lay them off, and how SAS didn't really do layoffs, her chest got redder and redder. By the time she finished talking, her neck and chest looked sunburnt.
Wonder if it has something to do with being eligible to apply for internal postings for 30 days - if you watch closely it's the 30-day mark when they disappear.
Remember how back in the day, a person's internal directory listing would slowly disappear line-by-line over the span of a few days?
I don't know.
Speaking of which, where's Paula?