If all of this talk is true how will RSC layoffs actually be handled? Seniority or Performance? Can you please back up your answer with proof on this post?
7 replies (most recent on top)
it is not solely based on performance. There are many that were not on the surplus that have a long lasting reputation of being under performers or lazy. If it is based on performance, I would ask if your managers are rating properly on yearly reviews and how much weight that carries.
Neither. Your management is given a quota of people to surplus. So if your management has to get rid of 10 people, that's what is going to happen. If you are not in the in-group, you are toast. AT&T is VERY good at making sure they don't get sued for age discrimination and EEO distribution.
We lost 4 top people all senior. We found out the reason was exactly as stated in the other post. the manager eluded to the same reason.
Performance and required skills are used to stack people. The Skills change based on the number of people needed to fit the cuts. Executives change skill requirements to allow the number to be reached.
Ever wonder why it seems people who get axed were good workers. Age does enter into the formula. Higher pay is a problem for budgets and it's not hared to understand new employees ae paid less.
Also the company was a place to retire and now it's high level is at best 10 years.
The reason Randall states skills need to be updated every 2 years is to allow the layoff of people before the 10 year level.
Seniority is the way it would be handled.
All Mobility labor agreements can be found in hrOnestop. Any employee can access them and see the specifics for their contract.
Performance? You are talking about the wrong company