So, I've got comments from both ends, but I think your advice is super interesting, especially from the employer-side of things.
>A lot of people who get laid off want to know why them and not a peer. Was their peer a better performer at the same pay grade? Or was their peer doing the same job for less money? Is the company looking to eliminate senior roles? Junior roles? Or was the selection completely random?
Hm. So, as an employee, I wouldn't believe any of those answers, were the boss to give them to me. As someone else said, "Severance... everything else is just words" - but it is important to remember that most people are not as cynical as I am.
As an employer, though, that advice is interesting... because really, it seems kind of shitty to say "I'm sorry bob, but it turns out that Joe is just three times more effective than you are. I think he's just smarter." which is what I'd say if I really was giving the unvarnished truth. I mean, a lot of times, there isn't really much Bob could do about it; he's just not as smart as Joe is; it's not really his fault.
but my instinct, when I don't know what the right thing to say, is to just tell the truth, so your advice appeals to me. but it just seems like this is one of those 'does my butt look big' situations where keeping my damnfool mouth shut is the best option.
Is this what you would want to hear? How would you feel if the boss told you someone else was three times as effective as you were and you disagreed with that assessment?
>That way the person let go knows whether and how to adjust their performance going forward at their next job so they're more likely to survive that company's inevitable layoffs.
As an employee, I say that you always want to be in the first round of layoffs. The severance is usually best at that point, and even if the company did a good job and fired the people who were, say, half as productive, those people did some work, and that work still needs to get done. Guess who gets to do it? You! the "Lucky" person who didn't get laid off!
I've never gotten the axe in a layoff... I've been fired, but that's a different thing. More than once I've ended up quitting after the first or second round of layoffs because the company expected me to work twice as hard for the same money (and no possibility of a raise) with half the support I had before.
Any lawyer is going to tell you to keep your mouth shut in this situation. Anything you say at this point may be held against you later. Sucks, but true.
Yeah, but all my assets are in my company... and really, once someone has had root on your servers? It's pretty much impossible to take that away without their consent. A "clean wipe and re-install from backups before this person had root" is going to leave me with nothing bout a smoking crater, financially speaking.
Also, you just saw what happened on Reddit. Firing someone who is in contact with your customers can backfire in ways way worse than a discrimination lawsuit, if you screw it up.
so... at least when dealing with my own stuff, while I'm sure my insurance company would prefer I follow your advice, it's probably in my own best interest to do whatever it is I can do to avoid pissing off the outgoing employee, even if it does give them more leverage if it comes to a legal fight.
I mean, I'm not sure if the commentor I'm responding to is right or not, but getting sued for wrongful termination is pretty far down the list of things you should be worrying about when you fire someone as a small company.
Obviously every case is different, and it's up to you to weigh the upside vs. the downside - but this is the advice you'll get. And if you're on the receiving side and wondering why they won't say boo about why you were let go, this is probably the reason.
> Is this what you would want to hear? How would you feel if the boss told you someone else was three times as effective as you were and you disagreed with that assessment?
I think it can be done in a way that is not so personal while still being useful. Instead of saying, "Joe gets 3x as much done!" You can simply say, "Given that the company is facing hard times, we looked at performance and pay of everyone at the company and kept the people we felt were the highest performers at the least cost."
I think that would get the message across without singling any specific individuals out.
>"Given that the company is facing hard times, we looked at performance and pay of everyone at the company and kept the people we felt were the highest performers at the least cost."
Hm. So the information you want is that it wasn't random or based on seniority. It was performance based, even though your performance wasn't low enough to get you fired outside of a layoff.
>A lot of people who get laid off want to know why them and not a peer. Was their peer a better performer at the same pay grade? Or was their peer doing the same job for less money? Is the company looking to eliminate senior roles? Junior roles? Or was the selection completely random?
Hm. So, as an employee, I wouldn't believe any of those answers, were the boss to give them to me. As someone else said, "Severance... everything else is just words" - but it is important to remember that most people are not as cynical as I am.
As an employer, though, that advice is interesting... because really, it seems kind of shitty to say "I'm sorry bob, but it turns out that Joe is just three times more effective than you are. I think he's just smarter." which is what I'd say if I really was giving the unvarnished truth. I mean, a lot of times, there isn't really much Bob could do about it; he's just not as smart as Joe is; it's not really his fault.
but my instinct, when I don't know what the right thing to say, is to just tell the truth, so your advice appeals to me. but it just seems like this is one of those 'does my butt look big' situations where keeping my damnfool mouth shut is the best option.
Is this what you would want to hear? How would you feel if the boss told you someone else was three times as effective as you were and you disagreed with that assessment?
>That way the person let go knows whether and how to adjust their performance going forward at their next job so they're more likely to survive that company's inevitable layoffs.
As an employee, I say that you always want to be in the first round of layoffs. The severance is usually best at that point, and even if the company did a good job and fired the people who were, say, half as productive, those people did some work, and that work still needs to get done. Guess who gets to do it? You! the "Lucky" person who didn't get laid off!
I've never gotten the axe in a layoff... I've been fired, but that's a different thing. More than once I've ended up quitting after the first or second round of layoffs because the company expected me to work twice as hard for the same money (and no possibility of a raise) with half the support I had before.