Major Shaw layoffs in the near future?

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Only anecdotal evidence, of course, but a friend told me that entire (or large portions of) departments are taking the package. Many were accepting within a day or two of the offer!

[nik-]

This is so idiotic. The fact that they're actually surprised that so many people took the package when they basically worded it as they're gutting the behind the scenes staff is just hilarious.

I bet their reaction being surprise reaffirmed that the decision to leave by those that chose the package was the correct one.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by nik-

This is so idiotic. The fact that they're actually surprised that so many people took the package when they basically worded it as they're gutting the behind the scenes staff is just hilarious.

I bet their reaction being surprise reaffirmed that the decision to leave by those that chose the package was the correct one.

Like I said earlier in the thread, as soon as that offer came my way my response would have been:

"Gimme! Gimme! Gimme!"

Because you know its happening one way or another and when it inevitably happens later the terms and circumstances are going to be a lot less fun.

I've spoken with 8 Shaw employees about this some are clients or friends and even a couple of CPers, if you have any severance questions fire me a PM.

[lazypucker]

The way it was executed is stupid. If Shaw wants to package out 650 staff members, why don't they offer the packages in waves. First wave to those who the company wants to get rid of the most, and then reassess the numbers and offering a second or third wave until it gets down to the desired number? Offering 6,500 on the get go you have no control over how many will or will not take the package...

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

The way it was executed is stupid. If Shaw wants to package out 650 staff members, why don't they offer the packages in waves. First wave to those who the company wants to get rid of the most, and then reassess the numbers and offering a second or third wave until it gets down to the desired number? Offering 6,500 on the get go you have no control over how many will or will not take the package...

guess you were wrong and many people did feel the offer was a golden goose egg.
I know I did.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

guess you were wrong and many people did feel the offer was a golden goose egg.
I know I did.

What an odd response.

[Regorium]

I'm curious how they're gonna backtrack on this.

Say 4000 people take the offer, do they just say no? Can they?

[photon]

Just turn the package into a retention bonus!

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

The way it was executed is stupid. If Shaw wants to package out 650 staff members, why don't they offer the packages in waves. First wave to those who the company wants to get rid of the most, and then reassess the numbers and offering a second or third wave until it gets down to the desired number? Offering 6,500 on the get go you have no control over how many will or will not take the package...

the issue with this strategy is that it will be a massive blow to morale and decrease performance because you end up with a bunch of adults acting pathetically.

Speaking from experience with this type of situation, you basically get:

a) people so worried about their jobs that they begin toxic, cut-throat, individualistic / team-destroying behaviors which is terrible for an organization

b) a long drawn out saga which indulges people to wander around fretting about their jobs, gossiping, having a reason to go "get a coffee" to bitch about so and so

c) disillusionment with good staff that get tired of the never ending drama and then quit, when you wish they didn't- don't forget you've also telegraphed that likely raises / bonuses will be non-existent.

My old company was amazing at layoffs. It was like a hobby for them and man were they good at it. The way to do layoffs is a 1 time event, no warning, no coaxing people for packages, no drama, just cut the poor performers, call a meeting and explain you're just cutting costs and it's a tough day and you wish you didn't have to, and move on.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Wormius

What an odd response.

not really.
earlier in the thread he was saying the deal wouldn't be that great for most people and it wasn't a golden goose egg.
by the response of staff, apparently it was a pretty dang good offer, like most people thought.

[Oling_Roachinen]

But along with the package was the ultimatum that if you don't take it, the involuntary layoffs would not be as generous. The president called it a "one-time offer" along with stating that the company would become much leaner with it's workforce, that's a big red flag.

Stick around in an unsecured job in a career that may not be viable in the near future with no guarantee of anything, or take a generous package. Without knowing the intricacies of the office dynamic, that's getting to be a no-brainer without having that generous package be a "golden goose egg."

[Raekwon]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

not really.
earlier in the thread he was saying the deal wouldn't be that great for most people and it wasn't a golden goose egg.
by the response of staff, apparently it was a pretty dang good offer, like most people thought.

Maybe quote that post and it would make more sense

[kermitology]

I've got a couple of sources at Shaw. Company wide it's around 25% acceptance of the package, but certain regions or departments are being completely decimated. Winnipeg is going to be a ghost town for Shaw offices for example.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I've got a couple of sources at Shaw. Company wide it's around 25% acceptance of the package, but certain regions or departments are being completely decimated. Winnipeg is going to be a ghost town for Shaw offices for example.

Presumably using the package to move somewhere else.

[Nsd1]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I've got a couple of sources at Shaw. Company wide it's around 25% acceptance of the package, but certain regions or departments are being completely decimated. Winnipeg is going to be a ghost town for Shaw offices for example.

The WiFi in Winnipeg is about to get crappier.

[Raekwon]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I've got a couple of sources at Shaw. Company wide it's around 25% acceptance of the package, but certain regions or departments are being completely decimated. Winnipeg is going to be a ghost town for Shaw offices for example.

So in theory if everyone left that office and took the package could they just re apply for all of the open positions? Not that I could see them taking them back unless they were desperate.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I've got a couple of sources at Shaw. Company wide it's around 25% acceptance of the package, but certain regions or departments are being completely decimated. Winnipeg is going to be a ghost town for Shaw offices for example.

Really? Thats interesting, my wife's friend took a transfer to Winnipeg with Shaw for a new position. I wonder how thats going...

[I-Hate-Hulse]

I was talking to an installer and he said the packages also come with a 1 yr non-compete clause. Specifically, he can't sign with Telus. It's legal, but at the same time options are limited for installers...

Sounded like Shaw was moving to Telus's model of equipment install and tech support. All terrible IMHO. The only reason why I've stuck with Shaw is their superior tech support. If I have problems I know they'll roll a truck and fix it.

Without this I guess I'll just have to take the $700 and superior hardware that Telus always dangles at me....

[Wormius]

How enforceable are those non-compete clauses anyway? From what I understood, even if you sign them there isn't much a former employer can do.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Locke

Really? Thats interesting, my wife's friend took a transfer to Winnipeg with Shaw for a new position. I wonder how thats going...

She's probably really, really busy covering for all the people that took packages.