Since this is my second go-around with the whole laid-off
thing-y, I figured it’s time to clue you in on a few facts nobody else will
tell you:
The company doesn’t
care about you. We’ve all long ago dispensed of the notion of 30 years with
the same company and the gold-watch dinner. Today, that seems like a quaint
relic of the “Downton Abbey” era when people dressed for dinner and nobody
thought knocking down three martinis before bedtime was a bad thing.
More shocking is how ruthless, cunning and callous companies
are when it comes to slicing away staff for the sake of supposedly saving the
bottom line. (By company, I mean upper management, the people in the C-suite,
who are somehow protected from layoffs even though it was probably their
boneheaded schemes that led the company to financial ruin.)
What an example? At my former company, they laid off a woman
who had just returned that day to
work after completing treatment for breast cancer. I think they waited until
she returned to lay off all of us. According to a distant cousin who
specializes in employment law, companies can do that. But just because they can
doesn’t make it any less deplorable.
So whenever you hear some corporate tool mew about how bad
he feels about having to let good workers go, don’t believe it. They care only
about protecting themselves (and their golden parachutes when the company eventually
folds) and their handpicked puppets. They don’t care about you, your family or
the career you’ve built. They only care about themselves and the company, never the workers.
And I cringe every time I read or hear someone say how hard
it is for a company to lay off workers or for a boss to tell a worker he or she
is being laid off. Who is really getting the worse deal here? Who walks out of
the room without a job? Case closed.
Companies are only concerned if it becomes public knowledge
that they’ve laid off staff. It makes them look bad (for good reason). Both
times when was I laid off, it was reported in the press the next day and my
former bosses were livid. They went completely bonkers over the reporting of
the truth. (Neither leak came from me.)
So you see, companies don’t care about you. After you’ve
been laid off they want you gone, never to be seen or heard from again. Sort of
like “You’re dead to me Fredo” without the bullet to the back of the head.
You’ve been lied to.
Both times I was laid off, I was told it had nothing to do with my work
performance. Well, OK, then, why was I laid off and some do-nothing boob kept
on staff?
Because here’s how it works: Upper management tells middle
management it has to cut staff. Middle managers (or the All White Male Club as
I like to call them) sits in some conference room and discusses who stays and
who goes. And that’s where the devious malarkey begins.
How devious? At my former workplace, the head of our department (an egotistical fanboy who has somehow conned upper management into thinking he is oh-so-great; he's not) sent around an email detailing new duties for the staff. These changes, he said, were meant to free up the editors for major projects. HA! It was a total lie. In hindsight, that memo was really a guide to who was going to be laid off and who was retained. Nearly all who had duties taken away (like me) were laid off. I even had to teach someone else how to do my job. Nice, huh?
Remember, these are human beings with hidden agendas. They
are out not only to save themselves, but their sycophants and lapdogs. It’s
only natural they would take this opportunity to dropkick anyone who, although
a stellar worker, may not be their favorite.
Let’s not forget we, the potentially laid-off employees,
never know what is said in those malicious meetings or the reasons we were
given the boot while others were spared. We'll never know the truth and that's torture.
So you see it’s a system that promotes favoritism and is tailor-made
to be unfair. It’s totally
fugazy.
You’ve probably been
stabbed in the back. There she goes, being paranoid again. But going back
to number 2, don’t you think there’s a better than good chance you were given
the shaft by a former colleague or boss?
At my former former workplace, the day before I was laid
off, a group of former former co-workers had a meeting with my nasty former
former boss. I learned later that they argued in favor of keeping one colleague
while throwing the rest of us under the bus. I know who led that discussion, a
former former colleague whose bridal shower I attended. I can’t be sure (who
can be?), but I don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility that she
wanted me—a more senior staff member—gone because she saw me as a possible threat to her job.
Well, she got wish: I was laid off and she’s since gotten two promotions. Funny
thing, though, I never challenged her position and always went out of my way to
do what was asked of me. Lot of good that did me!
Just keep in mind that when rumors of layoffs start swirling
about an office (as they always do), it becomes like the Titanic or The Hunger Games. Everyone
starts scrambling to save themselves and they don’t care who they have to trample to
get to that lifeboat of a steady paycheck.
The employment market
is improving. Oh……HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Really, does anyone believe that crap? I noticed soon after
some articles came out about how the job market was improving and the
unemployment rate had dropped to 6.6 percent (!?), economists and other experts
pointed out it was a mirage, that the many long-term unemployed have given up
looking for work or were not counted in the rolls of employable workers, and
companies are not hiring in any great numbers.
The most pernicious aspect of those falsely encouraging stats
is that it gives some stupid politician the ammunition they need not to extend
unemployment benefits to the millions who have exhausted their much-needed
funds after 26 weeks. I even heard one idiot congressman say that unemployment
benefits should be “means tested.” For instance, if one person in a household
makes $90,000 a year and the other spouse is unemployed, the jobless partner
shouldn’t receive benefits.
On the surface, that’s sounds plausible. But what if that
household depends on two paychecks? What if they have a family to support and a
mortgage? Not to mention that unemployed workers are entitled to those benefits
on a temporarily basis. It’s never that simple.
To my mind, “means testing” are just code words for,
“We don’t want to give any tax dollars of our hard-earned money to lazy bums.”
I wish there were a way to make the process of being laid off fairer and more humane. But as long as the system stays as is, I doubt it will ever change.