Thread regarding Follett layoffs

Volunteers

Follett leadership, you don't need to abuse and disrespect your employees. Instead of the layoffs randomly picked that eliminate employees who want to stay and contribute and gets rid of some employees that are low performers and contributors, just ask for volunteers.

I have heard from many employees that they are willing to volunteer. It is a win-win as Follett keeps the employees that want to stay and those that want to volunteer will be happy. There is much lower risk of lawsuits and it would be far less damaging to employee morale. After all Follett still needs the remaining employees engaged to succeed. Several large companies have used this approach in the past.

by
| 1418 views | | 7 replies (last April 7, 2016) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+GMMEBKL

7 replies (most recent on top)

So now they layoff people, and the jobs they used to do are poorly documented and noone knows how to do them. There is no planning for layoffs to make sure work is documented so it can continue.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1iew+GMMEBKL

they've done that before.... and lost more people than anticipated.... then had to hire more people back and train them.... too much work already to add training to the few who are Follett followers. It may work, but the way they did it previously only caused more problems. They may be concerned that the worker bees will all leave and with them, years of knowledge.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1kbq+GMMEBKL

It wouldn't even have to be retirement. It could just be Follett needs to get rid of payroll. Ask for volunteers and layoff those first. It is the same impact except you are getting rid of employees that don't want to work at Follett. Do you know how many employees are just doing the bare minimum because they don't care about Follett anymore. If they get too many volunteers, select first come first serve. The severance wouldn't even have to change.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1eor+GMMEBKL

When companies offer early retirement, a pension isn't required. The company I worked at had no pension. When an employee has worked for a company for 20+ years, it's assumed they're paid well (compared to an entry level person doing same job.). The savings comes from eliminating the higher pay going to an older employee who is likely missing more time (more vacation accrued, more sick time) who is less healthy (high insurance premiums). It helps the bottom line with ROI realized in a year or two.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cyf+GMMEBKL

I have only seen early retirement offered by companies with pensions, which Follett does not. When this happens companies do this because it reduces expense based labor.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wbe+GMMEBKL

Especially when it comes to people with 20+ years in the business, Follett could extend an early retirement package. It would be a great way to thank people with years of service to the company, it would end this 4 year program of abuse and suddenly stupid, it would help re-establish Follett as a company that recognizes that employees make a huge difference in the success of a company.

I have seen how popular early retirement packages are. The benefit could be done a sliding scale with the number of years in service being added to a persons age. If that total is 65 or 70, and if the company can do without the employee, the package is offered. It is the employees choice.

Great idea that would never be considered by these low functioning chimps.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rel+GMMEBKL

You should volunteer to have your head checked , dont just bend over and take it .

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kkg+GMMEBKL

Post a reply

: