From everything I've heard almost twice as many people pushed the button as anticipated. I think they expected all of the long tenure button pushers, but I think the low tenure button pushers was a surprise.
Does anyone think that HR may look at why so many people pushed the button and try to enact policies to change the culture?
I wonder if they are at all concerned that VZ will get a bad rap as an employer, especially with the millenials they are hoping to back fill the oversubscribed areas.
This came up on one of our director calls. He said they're looking at it.
@1opg, you had me at first. Your logic seemed, well, logical, specifically your belief that, if you don’t get enough takers with a specific offer, you sweeten the deal.
It’s basic freshman Management 101, HR 101, Real Estate 101, Garage Sale 101, real fundamental stuff.
You went off the rails though, brother, in paragraph two, in which you ignore and totally fail to acknowledge that the money being paid “labor” to keep workers on payroll, rather than paying the same to let them go, was actually delivering an enormous ROI, with 4 years of labor being returned for that 4 years worth of money and 4 years worth of medical coverage, rather than zero for the same outlay of money.
Nice attempt at the jedi trick though.
Less generous offer the next time? I doubt it; the company wants people to leave and offering less will not do that. Folks will ride it out to the bitter end. What was offered this time was not that great once it is taxed.
If Hans wants techs to go he could spend a couple billion and offer 4 full years of pay and insurance and the 60+ crowd would sign up PDQ and anxiously wait for their last day. Most of his techs are Union and with this contract he will pay that same money anyway over the next 4 years. Might as well get them out now and replace them with unprotected, lower wage employees or with contractors.
Make the offer less generous next time.
It's a no-confidence vote with a payout.
Was already heard before the offer closed: "Package was too good." That's about as much introspection and self-examination as you can expect.
Glassdoor is useless, Verizon can easily bury negative reviews.
Everyone needs to tank our awful ceo on Glassdoor
if verizon were at all concerned about having reputation as a bad employer, there wouldn't be so many button pushers.
~20% pushed in my division which is what my VP says was expected.
If they get a rep as a bad place to work by younger workers they might change, but I doubt they care. Places like Glassdoor have ratings if they really tank then maybe.
If this is really true, AND it was considered unfortunate (rather than the more likely "Yeah! We got rid of even more of the dead wood than we hoped") my guess is that the HR takeaway would be:
Make the offer less generous next time.
So no, I don't think there would be any concern about the need to change culture!
Nope,
Management does not give a rip.
People are like carbon paper (for us older folks), and can be replaced.
Preferably by someone in India.