Major Shaw layoffs in the near future?

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by psicodude

I think a lot of posters are missing the bigger picture here. Shaw is essentially replacing a bunch of people with software/AI/automation to improve customer service. So your first point of support contact with Shaw will be with AI and if it can't help you, you will be passed to a human.

This is just the tip of the iceberg coming over the next few years. All large corporations that are required to provide B2C support are exploring this right now. I feel bad for those affected, but get used to it.

Except that the layoffs don't impact CSR/TSR roles.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

So anyone who is worried about the job market or the lack of competition/available jobs in the telecommunications industry should be considered a poor performer because they would prefer to keep their current job and aren’t wanting to jump all over a severance package? If they didn’t pull their weight relative to their wage why wouldn’t they just be fired?

I spoke in generalities. There likely will be people who are top performers who won't take the package and lower performers who will. Overall though when presented with this option the most confident of getting alternative employment will take the package and generally speaking these are the people with more transferable skills and potentially stronger performers.

With respect to why Shaw didn't just lay off their worst 10% from that group, I agree with you. Probably cheaper while retaining better talent to do just that. If I worked for Shaw, I would actually consider the way they are handling things more benevolent from an employee perspective than the alternative.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

If that ever becomes the norm, then the movies and TV won't get made anymore. No paying customers, no product.

Its already the norm for younger people IMO

Kodi, YouTube, IPTV

I can't imagine a 20 year old moving out and spending $200 on cable like I used to. You are lucky to get them to buy a Netflix subscription (that they split with four friends) These companies will have to make it far more convenient and affordable.

[Titan]

Originally Posted by Locke

Likewise if you have tax questions.

Why would you want people to PM Worth with tax questions? I would have thought an accountant could answer those?

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Kjesse

Someone asked me via PM if you can split the severance payment and put some in an RRSP and take the rest and be taxed. The answer is yes, and I responded to you via PM I think (and maybe hit the send button too many times) but for the rest watching:

If you get a lump sum severance payment, the usual amount of taxes are not deducted. This is the formula from the CRA for what your employer has to remit:

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-age...-payments.html

That might help your or not at the time of payment, but at the time you file your tax return, you may have to make up the taxes or even get a refund, but at the most it will defer taxes that you will have to make up in the eventual tax filing.\

So if the lump taxed sum is over $15K, the employer must deduct 30% and remit it to the CRA. You might get that back, maybe not depending on your tax situation. The rule is old and needs adjustment.

That's why my severance had so much tax taken off.

[Crackmacs]

I miss working at Shaw. Laid off in 2015 (thanks, shomi!). Most of the people were really cool, and the benefits rocked. Getting laid off was pretty hard though, first time it'd ever happened to me. Everything worked out great for me, but still #### was tough for a while.

Hope everything works out for people that decide to take the money and run, or stick it out (and probably get laid off anyway).

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Kjesse

Someone asked me via PM if you can split the severance payment and put some in an RRSP and take the rest and be taxed. The answer is yes, and I responded to you via PM I think (and maybe hit the send button too many times) but for the rest watching:

If you get a lump sum severance payment, the usual amount of taxes are not deducted. This is the formula from the CRA for what your employer has to remit:

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-age...-payments.html

That might help your or not at the time of payment, but at the time you file your tax return, you may have to make up the taxes or even get a refund, but at the most it will defer taxes that you will have to make up in the eventual tax filing.\

So if the lump taxed sum is over $15K, the employer must deduct 30% and remit it to the CRA. You might get that back, maybe not depending on your tax situation. The rule is old and needs adjustment.

This is very important within the context of a severance package.

You may get some of that back as a tax refund depending on income circumstances, but within the frame of timing that money is not accessible to you until your tax return is filed, so it may be gone for a year, if it happened today you likely wouldnt see a dime of it until March of 2019. A year during which you havent invested it, saved it or had it available to live on.

Its part of the consideration between taking the lump sum or breaking the payment up, in conjunction with your own opinions or plans about future employment.

And I generally agree with KJesse, its a bad rule in the context of severances because of the volatile and uncertain nature of future employment and the need for liquid cash while trying to get another job.

In other forms its a necessary evil because people dont save their money and its all hookers and blow until the Tax Bill comes.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Cameron Swift

According to the CBC story, the company expects 10% of the affected employees to take the package. Seems somewhat low, no?

I expect the percentage that will take the offer, will be very high.

What Shaw employees will look at, when this wave is completed and the offer is gone.

Will they layoff another batch of employees shortly after (i.e. at lesser severance)?

I bet they will lose, a lot of the high performers who have lots of years of service..... They will take the severance and change jobs quickly.

It will be messy.

[Shazam]

Meh, could turn out either way. Poor performers often have a inflated view of their worth, so they'll take the package thinking it's easy to get another job. Then the good performers stay because there's fewer dumbos.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Meh, could turn out either way. Poor performers often have a inflated view of their worth, so they'll take the package thinking it's easy to get another job. Then the good performers stay because there's fewer dumbos.

Oh I bet, it will be complete reverse, the high performers will take the severance.

As they be really comfortable finding another job.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by flambers

Oh I bet, it will be complete reverse, the high performers will take the severance.

As they be really comfortable finding another job.

They probably won't offer it to the people they want to keep. Unless its a blanket thing but that would be silly IMO. Haven't read up on it.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by flambers

Oh I bet, it will be complete reverse, the high performers will take the severance.

As they be really comfortable finding another job.

Based on other places where I've seen voluntary severance happen, the vast majority that take it are > 50 years old. Not sure how many employees Shaw has that are that old.

Let's just say the Dunning-Kruger effect is real.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Weitz

They probably won't offer it to the people they want to keep. Unless its a blanket thing but that would be silly IMO. Haven't read up on it.

Yes and no.

There may be competent employees that they would prefer to keep but dont fit into the new model they're trying to employ.

Just because you're good at what you do doesnt mean that the people you do it for want to keep paying you to keep doing it for them anymore. It sucks but it happens.

[Shazam]

What does "good at what you do" mean? If you make the company profit or you can minimize expenses, then you have a good chance of keeping your job.

Obviously neither of those two things apply to government jobs, which explains iggy_oi's point of view on everything.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Shazam

What does "good at what you do" mean? If you make the company profit or you can minimize expenses, then you have a good chance of keeping your job.

What? No.

The company provides cable television services primarily.

That industry is changing. Dramatically. Its not like you can just go next-door and work for them instead doing the same thing that your current company is phasing out.

They're doing this for a reason.

[Shazam]

Oh I'm just speaking in general terms.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Shazam

What does "good at what you do" mean? If you make the company profit or you can minimize expenses, then you have a good chance of keeping your job.

Obviously neither of those two things apply to government jobs, which explains iggy_oi's point of view on everything.

I am not really sure what the link is between profitability of a company and the skills of the engineers and software programmers they might employ. Nortel, Smart, lots of tech companies employed engineers and programmers who were very good at their jobs.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I am not really sure what the link is between profitability of a company and the skills of the engineers and software programmers they might employ. Nortel, Smart, lots of tech companies employed engineers and programmers who were very good at their jobs.

Well have you ever worked at a tech company? You really can't figure it out? Do you really think all engineers and software programmers are the same?

Gee you watch hockey, are all forwards and d-men the same?

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by flambers

Oh I bet, it will be complete reverse, the high performers will take the severance.

As they be really comfortable finding another job.

I'm guessing the top performers would probably be left off the list of potential staff to get packages? Wouldn't Managers be asked to put their best staff on a 'must keep' list?

[puffnstuff]

Nope, the offer was apparently sent to all employees. No picking and choosing was done. Exit dates are, at least from the news story, anywhere from end of March to 18 months out.