Stop bringing down people's ratings to find excuses to lay them off. It is not working well for morale and damaging relationships within the company. Just fess up to the fact that the company is going through tough times and needs to cut workforce. Tell people that is the reason they are being laid off not their sudden drop in rating. Do it with dignity. People will react to this better.
3 replies (most recent on top)
- Any person, or agent or officer thereof, who, after having
discharged an employee from the service of such person or after an
employee has voluntarily left such service, by any misrepresentation
prevents or attempts to prevent the former employee from obtaining
employment, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
- Any person who knowingly causes, suffers, or permits an
agent, superintendent, manager, or employee in his employ to commit a
violation of sections 1050 and 1051, or who fails to take all
reasonable steps within his power to prevent such violation is guilty
of a misdemeanor.
- Nothing in this chapter shall prevent an employer or an
agent, employee, superintendent or manager thereof from furnishing,
upon special request therefor, a truthful statement concerning the
reason for the discharge of an employee or why an employee
voluntarily left the service of the employer. If such statement
furnishes any mark, sign, or other means conveying information
different from that expressed by words therein, such fact, or the
fact that such statement or other means of furnishing information was
given without a special request therefor is prima facie evidence of
a violation of sections 1050 to 1053.
- In addition to and apart from the criminal penalty provided
any person or agent or officer thereof, who violates any provision of
sections 1050 to 1052, inclusive, is liable to the party aggrieved,
in a civil action, for treble damages. Such civil action may be
brought by such aggrieved person or his assigns, or successors in
interest, without first establishing any criminal liability under
this article.
This common practice may get them sued because most of the alternate employers in SD are government contractors. If a job requires security clearance, they do in depth background checks, including requesting info on performance.
This common practice may have been used in the past allegedly to keep H-1Bs quotas intact so that they did not have to declare layoff. If they declared layoff, they might not be able to get new h1-b for awhile, allegedly.