My former employer had a major downsizing in November 2013. I was one of the people let go, despite having really good reviews and whatnot.
About six weeks before this happened, my boss started too seriously nitpick everything I did, so I wasn’t overly surprised that I was let go. She was nitpicking things like my body language and incorrectly updating a ridiculously complicated spreadsheet that everyone screwed up. Just dumb stuff.
When I was laid off, I wasn’t given a cause other than, layoffs. I got severance and unemployment, and friends from the company stepped up to give references (since the company can’t officially provide those anyway).
A few months later a possible explanation occurred to me. Healthcare costs. The company is self-insured (meaning they pay their own medical claims). I probably have the highest medical cost in my department (if not the division), and none of it is fixable with exercise and diet and a “wellness program”.
Of course, in Canada this isn’t an issue. However, there may be other things that aren’t immediately obvious.
Wow, what a crappy story. I can’t help but think the reason you were put through all that bullshit is that there was some sort of disagreement among the management and they couldn’t come to a decision over how to replace you, and so the decision just got put off and put off until finally someone managed to bulldoze through the “make him quit” idea.
What a crock. What’s wrong with “Hey, thanks for your work but we’re going in another direction with the blah-blah-blah and the xmls and the javas and whatever, so see ya later, we’d show you to the door but you’re already working remotely…so…anyway…kthxbai”.
Move her to where? The East Wing that we built special for her?
All desks were filled. We shuffled some people around to put the people least bothered nearest to her and the people most bothered farthest away but it ended up creating more problems than it solved.
Sorry, but the world doesn’t revolve around meowers.
She wasn’t diagnosed with anything at all. Her friends and family may have been willing to indulge her unique and special little quirk, and that’s fine. At work, we were not. She can be oh so special and cute somewhere else.
This would be true is it were a firing for cause. In the case of a layoff or restructuring, not so much. At my company we keep a list of associates ranked relative to each other at the department level. A literal 1-XXX listing. That list, while as objective as possible, may differ somewhat from a ordinal ranking of their performance review scores. For example, a Widget Inspector I may have a performance review score of 4.5 out of 5 (excelling) because he inspects 110 widgets per hour vs their goal of 100/hour. A Widget Inspector II may have a performance review score of 3.75 out of 5 (performing) because he inspects 145 per hour vs his goal of 150. Even though the Inspector I has a higher performance review score, they would rank below the Inspector II on the departmental scale based on volume inspected (all other being equal). Layoffs would likely target the Inspector I first, just on the basis of sheer volume of work completed.
There are many factors that go into the departmental ranking, including but not limited to cross training, cross functional process knowledge, attendance, tenure, quality, etc.
I work in the technology sector and I kind of feel like people get fired for pretty much “no reason” all the time. Heck, it’s even happened to me a bunch of times.
It’s usually not “no reason” though. It may simply be the company is going in a new direction and they want someone else in your position. Like if you’ve been the IT director of a $10 million company and they need an IT director of the $50 million company they want to become.
Or maybe things are slow and they need to reduce headcount.
Or maybe you pissed someone off.
Or maybe your boss pissed someone off and then he left the company and now you’re stuck because you were “his guy”.
Some fields (like mine in management and technology consulting for example), “general opinion” is at least as important as your technical skills. Most of your work is with clients and on teams. If the clients and your team mates don’t like you, you better be a freakin tech rock star.
In my experience as a manager it is often necessary to dismiss employees for no clear reason. What happens is that business is down and you have to make cuts. Maybe you are able to limit the cuts to just one person, but in any case you are looking at many factors, objective and subjective. Who’s skills are in most demand? Who’s skills are most easily covered by other staff? Maybe they are not a problem employee, but they are surrounded by very high performers. Sometimes the business demands that someone is voted off the island, and those that will impact the business the least will be targets, even if they are solid people.
Or she may have had Tourette’s syndrome. If this was the case, and she was diagnosed, accommodations would need to be made, or she would have legitimate grounds for a lawsuit.
Which is why if it’s a layoff it is better to be without warning and with no stated reason. And I don’t want to know about your personal medical issues in any way. It gives plausible deniability.
It has a lot of merit. Speaking as one who has managed people in a skill-intensive field for many years (accounting), I have learned that hiring based on personality has served me much better than hiring based solely on education or experience.
Call it corporate-speak all you want, but hiring “a good fit” is far more productive than hiring the one with the most education/experience/check marks on a list of qualifications.
Being able to work and play well with others means everything.
ETA: I’m in agreement with others in this thread: I think the OP knows exactly why he/she was let go.
I’m sure your experience differs, but mine is that restructuring type layoffs are pretty much performance independent - except for superstars. When we had one because a project got cancelled most everyone working on the project got notices, but there was a job fair where we on other projects got to interview and transfer people we liked. I got someone good that way. It was a hot market and most people took the package and found another job.
This makes sense because in my area you can’t afford to get rid of people with specific project knowledge in favor of someone else who’d have to learn, even if the second person did get a higher ranking. Chaos would ensue. If you have hundreds of people doing equivalent things then I can see it.
What do you think goes in personnel files? I’m sure there is time off and stuff like that, but it is mostly personal perceptions. I’ve done lots of performance reviews in my life, and I assure you that there is no mathematical equation to assign someone a ranking. It is the perceptions of the managers, supported by their report of their accomplishments, and comparisons with other people. Some people are tied, but mostly we had pretty good agreement on who was on the top and who was on the bottom. If someone were weird or obnoxious - and didn’t perform - they would not do well.
Politics is another way of saying you have to deal with what is important to the people ranking you. Scorn it at your peril.