Can someone argue convincingly that this is ethical?
[deleted]
Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees
111–120 of 155 posts
Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees
#112Can someone argue convincingly that this is ethical?
Layoffs suck.
I think I would be upset if I was laid off but those on medical or baby leave were specifically given a pass. It kind of feels like a slap on the face for those whom are unable to have kids.
Layoffs should be focused on performance, cost of salary, team business utility, etc.
That said, if layoffs disproportionately hit those on that are on medical leave, that would be pretty cruel.
Moreover, I think those laid off during leave should be given additional severance due to the incredible imposition.
Everywhere I've worked has stipulated that leave, sabbaticals, etc. were still subject to layoffs.
Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees
#113Can someone argue convincingly that this is ethical?
Layoffs suck. I think I would be upset if I was laid off but those on medical or baby leave were specifically given a pass. It kind of feels like a slap on the face for those whom are unable to have kids. Layoffs should be focused on performance, cost of salary, team business utility, etc. That said, if layoffs disproportionately hit those on that are on medical leave, that would be pretty cruel. Moreover, I think th…
Layoffs shouldnt be focused on anything. Corporations shouldnt be at liberty to drop workers as it suits them, their need to be stronger worker protections so that preventative action is mandatory.
Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees
#114Can someone argue convincingly that this is ethical?
Nothing about firing 12K people while doing hundreds of billions of dollars in share buybacks is ethical, yet here we are.
Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees
#115Can someone argue convincingly that this is ethical?
Where I am, a long time ago, it was a unwritten rule to leave people on medical leave employed. Then I suspect when they are back at work maybe they would be let go. Back then I never knew anyone in this situation. I do know a few that were fired while on leave in the past few years.
But with how the US medical system has pretty much transitioned from non-profits to profits, I doubt there can be any argument saying doing this is OK. Money now talks more than it did years ago.
Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees
#116Isn’t the whole point of severance compensation for terminating your employment and other prior agreements, given that you are not at fault?
It doesn’t really make sense for one to demand both severance and their leave.
From my understanding the Google severance effectively pays you more than maternity leave anyways unless you were at Google for less than 3 years. I wonder how many are in that situation.
One example in the article involved a person who had been at Google for 10 years. They would receive 36 weeks severance. More than the 24 weeks they would receive as maternity leave.
It seems that person is arguing they should receive 60 weeks severance.
Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees
#117Can someone argue convincingly that this is ethical?
If these people want severance on top of maternity leave, it’s not really fair to the other people laid off.
I’m not sure how you can conclude that, unless you’re just saying that parental and medical leave is inherently unfair. If that’s your position, feel free to argue it separately (strong “only in America” vibes, but whatever).
The issue here is simply whether Google should honor the commitments Google already made. If Google approved your leave, I’d say you’re entitled to it, no different than if you had accrued paid vacation time per Google’s vacation rules.
Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees
#118Can someone argue convincingly that this is ethical?
If these people want severance on top of maternity leave, it’s not really fair to the other people laid off.
Howso? Medical leave wad available to all employees, including those who were laid off.
Especially with modern family planning, it is possible to be strategic about when to use such leave, and natural to include the expectation of continued employment upon return into the decision to use such leave.
I’m not claiming there’s a simple answer - I understand the point that it seems unfair that an employee on leave will “get more” than an employee who wasn’t, but at the same time, this is the commitment that Google made, and I can’t shake the feeling that a mother giving birth and then using the resulting benefit that she was promised should be entirely unrelated to any notions of severance.
If anything, it makes it look like Google is taking advantage of people on leave, not somehow leveling the playing field.
Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
Layoffs suck. I think I would be upset if I was laid off but those on medical or baby leave were specifically given a pass. It kind of feels like a slap on the face for those whom are unable to have kids. Layoffs should be focused on performance, cost of salary, team business utility, etc. That said, if layoffs disproportionately hit those on that are on medical leave, that would be pretty cruel. Moreover, I think th…
Layoffs shouldnt be focused on anything. Corporations shouldnt be at liberty to drop workers as it suits them, their need to be stronger worker protections so that preventative action is mandatory.
> Corporations shouldnt be at liberty to drop workers as it suits them
Why not? If a business is facing headwinds, should it be forced to pay all its salaries and put everyone at the enterprise at risk? What about the investors, which also include employee shareholders and pension funds?
The economy is large and there are lots of jobs. Unemployment is low. Companies are literally waging a Darwinian battle for survival. Why should they be artificially shackled to past business decisions?
Companies aren't feel good communities. They try to be, but the reality is that it is blood sport that temporarily makes people income and wealth. Employment at lower ranks shields you from the realities of the competition and market dynamics.
Re: Google nixes paying out rest of medical leave for laid-off employees
#120Can someone argue convincingly that this is ethical?
This should not be a matter of ethics. Then it becomes up to individual companies. In Sweden, this is in law.