Fired? Speak No Evil
nytimes.com
Fired? Speak No Evil
1–10 of 378 posts
Re: Fired? Speak No Evil
#2I’m puzzled by one thing, if risk management is the concern: why not replace that clause by a candid, confidential conversation on what is wrong with the company? Any significant issue most likely affects more than one employee, including remaining ones.
It sounds typical of a culture driven by lawyers, rather than leaders.
Re: Fired? Speak No Evil
#3I’m puzzled by one thing, if risk management is the concern: why not replace that clause by a candid, confidential conversation on what is wrong with the company? Any significant issue most likely affects more than one employee, including remaining ones. It sounds typical of a culture driven by lawyers, rather than leaders.
In an ideal company culture, that conversation could have taken place at any time of the employee's tenure. Many companies do have exit-interviews designed to elicit this type of feedback. But with regard to severance ... companies know they have something of value, and many will seek to leverage that to their maximum advantage.
Re: Fired? Speak No Evil
#4The company is offering extra weeks of pay in return for not attacking them.
Why is this different than getting paid to do your job or meet a contract in other respects?
Re: Fired? Speak No Evil
#5If I don’t agree to this nondisparagement clause, I will not receive my severance — in this case, the equivalent of two weeks of pay.
For two weeks pay, I would not agree to anything. For two years pay, I would consider it.
I had no idea that professionals were given such ridiculous offers and expected to sign off on them. At my last job, I was guaranteed 1 year of severance in the event of losing my job. Fortunately, it never happened. At my current job I will get a relatively modest 24 weeks severance if I lose my job. If it ever comes to that, I plan on doing what some of my former co-workers did. Refuse to sign the "release of all claims" unless they give you a year severance and history has shown they'll give it to me.
Re: Fired? Speak No Evil
#6I’m puzzled by one thing, if risk management is the concern: why not replace that clause by a candid, confidential conversation on what is wrong with the company? Any significant issue most likely affects more than one employee, including remaining ones. It sounds typical of a culture driven by lawyers, rather than leaders.
Never been fired but I think of that as consulting. I have been asked for that kind of info on my way out, and said the same. I definitely would not be giving that out to to the company that just let me go.
Re: Fired? Speak No Evil
#7The thing is, people who are let go are going to be in a sour mood. They are often going to think of negative things, even (especially?) if they had a very positive experience, and ordinarily this would not be a signal that is important. But for a company that is reducing its burn rate, obviously public signals like what someone decides to say are hugely important. So it is really a reminder: "don't bad-mouth us please."
Why not just be fair, "In understanding the important relationship I had with my employer as a valued and insider employee, I will agree to be fair in any public representations made about the company, in deference to its important and precarious image at this critical stage. Nothing here should be construed as affecting my statutory rights."
I'd sign that in a heart-beat, and it might even be a good reminder.
Re: Fired? Speak No Evil
#8I’m puzzled by one thing, if risk management is the concern: why not replace that clause by a candid, confidential conversation on what is wrong with the company? Any significant issue most likely affects more than one employee, including remaining ones. It sounds typical of a culture driven by lawyers, rather than leaders.
Never been fired but I think of that as consulting. I have been asked for that kind of info on my way out, and said the same. I definitely would not be giving that out to to the company that just let me go.
You refuse exit interviews even when you are the one who's decided to leave?
Re: Fired? Speak No Evil
#9If I don’t agree to this nondisparagement clause, I will not receive my severance — in this case, the equivalent of two weeks of pay. For two weeks pay, I would not agree to anything. For two years pay, I would consider it. I had no idea that professionals were given such ridiculous offers and expected to sign off on them. At my last job, I was guaranteed 1 year of severance in the event of losing my job. Fortunately…
What country, industry?
Re: Fired? Speak No Evil
#10If I don’t agree to this nondisparagement clause, I will not receive my severance — in this case, the equivalent of two weeks of pay. For two weeks pay, I would not agree to anything. For two years pay, I would consider it. I had no idea that professionals were given such ridiculous offers and expected to sign off on them. At my last job, I was guaranteed 1 year of severance in the event of losing my job. Fortunately…
Let me suggest with all respect and much jealousy that your situation may not be common across employeers or jurisdictions. And that many people may not have the finances or flexibility to decline two weeks pay, unless they already have another job (or lots of work).
What you are discussing as an expected normal sounds like some utopian fantasy from here in Georgia, USA, an "at-will" hiring and firing state.