>"The reality is that our CX team has been running at 200% to 300% overstaffed for much of this year," she added. "
It's a thinly veiled lay-off.
It's a thinly veiled lay-off.
- The severance package is apparently very generous
- The relocation package is just $4K, not at all generous
- They’re giving ppl just 3 days to accept the relocation option, too little time for most people to decide on a major life move
Sounds like what they really want to do is a layoff, which is fine (especially if the severance package is strong), and a normal part of businesses. But they didn’t have the guts to just do it, and instead are doing a thinly veiled layoff that makes it seem like the employee’s choice.
“Oh hi Mark”
All this “see? They are not the angels they say they are!” I see in the comments here really feels disappointing to me. We should be happy such companies exist, as opposed to H&M for example.
“Good for business” is not something that is easy to measure and hence sometimes you make a decision without knowing what is better for business, which leaves the door open to ethics and moral values.
Example: „let’s reduce the waste we produce by reutilising more, which is going to cost us more in terms of logistics but if we can advertise it as green maybe it helps our sales” => impossible to conclusively verify, so what is going to drive the decision? Ethics, values (good or bad ones).
And all companies are not 100% unabatedly profit maximising machines. Some are, most of all the ones where faceless stock holders hold the power.