Thread regarding AT&T layoffs

Here's how it goes, say for a surplus event involving L2 management. VP level (L4) informs Director (L3)that he needs whatever the target % is. Director works with Area Manager (L2) to identify the unlucky ones (or lucky depending on your point of view). That person(s) selected will fall under one of these categories: 1. Documented poor performer (makes it easy). 2. Person(s) selected is an older person toward end of career, likely retirement eligible (expensive employee, and somehow seems more palatable to those making the decision as this person likely has older children out of school, etc.). 3. Person(s) selected has no relationship built up with current manager; indeed, was likely moved over to them after a previous surplus/ reorganization activity. Those making the decision will tend to protect those that they have history with over those that they don't. <<<This is how it works folks, I can assure you.

None of this will matter, the jobs will be off shored where possible. Think that one through on your criteria. Look around, this is a very diverse workforce.

I really don’t think they will be dumb enough to over index on a particular age/gender/race group. If anything, they may artificially be forced to pick some people who may be considered to be “good” and yet still let them go. Why? Because Of discrimination lawsuits. If the people being let go are disproportionately of one group (e.g. over 40) then there’s grounds for age discrimination lawsuit.

Now of course, during these layoffs, people who they want to fire but couldn’t previously, may be “bundled” into the layoff group. Firing someone is actually really hard. Legal implications galore. But simply adding them to the layoff group is much easier. Conversely, favorite pets may also be spared.

And yes, when you are going through cost reduction projects, everyone is just a number $$. You look at it from business case perspective.

Re: old and white as primary target logic. Not so. I was 63, Black with 36 years of service and surplused. Offshore peers were not surplused. Anyone still on payroll and not surplused and not ready to retire, count your blessings until your time is up.

Where you fall on the current vs the projected new organization chart is the first criteria. Volunteers are asked for. If not enough people volunteer it moves to involuntary. That involuntary pool is then ranked against their peers. I suspect salary is a factor in the ranking since cost savings is always a goal for this company. The lowest ranking is out first then on up the rankings until the head count based on span of control is met. In most cases con$ultant$ make recommendations. The person making the final decision knows you only from an org chart not as a person.

Old and White are the primary targets for layoffs

Somebody has a heart full of hate. I feel sorry for you. We all have more in common than differences. I work in an office where a majority of our 100 + occupants are minority. I’m one of the few white people on my floor. In our group, minorities are not surplus/impacted to the same degree as the white folks. Each and every one of my minority peers are top level contributors, educated professionals, and deserving of the respect garnered. I guess your bitterness causes you to overlook the AT&T status as a top company embracing, facilitating diversity. It’s not my place to tell you how or what to think. Sometimes we allow our thoughts to cause us to become the very thing we deplore... hate, bitterness, divisive. By the way, I am one of your white surplused co-workers. Each and everyone of non-impacted minority peers are deserving of their non-surplus status due to merit, abilities, results, education etc. May God bless you and help you with the things keeping you up at night.

You must be in an office where you are assign to do "Janitorial" work. That's why you are a "Minority"; everywhere else "Whites" with no prior related work experience, training, education background, high diploma ( forget about a college degree) are busy "writing long un-productive emails, taking credits of real work done by Minorities. AND, don't let me start with whites with "Degree and experience".

from past experience is really more with who you know and if they like you...

performance is really irrelevant.

I don’t know what office you are in but I can tell you in mine, white is the MINORITY and that’s a fact.

The "inappropriate" comment is a "True Fact", look around and count how many "Non-Whites" are there, how many are "Whites" qualified to be "there", how many "Try to work", How many "actually work". Between there " Vacation day", "doctor's / dentist appointments", "Kid's dance & sports practice", "volunteer work", "long lunches", "cigarettes breaks", "Net surfing", "email fights", " Monday night sports commentary ", "Fake sick & disability " , " taking credit of others work".

Should we need to say more..........

Keep the stupid comment to your wife & family.......

Lmao, it’s okay to be white

Some people are just STUPID!!

You can't be labeled /accused of being either if you only hire / retain white men. No one around to report the racists and harassers that way.

R u kidding, every manager I know is scared to death of any minority or woman, if you get labeled as a racist or a harasser you might as well pack your bags.

It's not based on results / sales ranking. I know of someone that was surplussed here that is always top ranked. It's a very biased process that allows them to keep whoever they want to. The "inappropriate" comment the previous posted made is unfortunately very true. Good luck to everyone who didn't win the popularity contest today.

That comment is totally inappropriate and not accurate!

Sales ranking.

Same criteria that got you in, is used to keep you in or out i.e. "Who you Know NOT what you know (for White Only) , Asians, Blacks, Latinos, etc.etc. are ALL OUT regardless of education, skills, experience, certification, awards. After all "AT&T is white man's country club".