274
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2023
274 points (97.2% liked)
Technology
59232 readers
739 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Sounds like the kind of shit you pull when you actively want attrition. There are times when a company needs to cut people and then layoffs happen. There are also times when the company is willing to say “we’re imposing policy X and if you can’t get with that, we’re happy to lose you.”
Which is bad management because it stops you being in control of who leaves and who stays.
In fact, you're more likely to lose the people you actually want to keep when playing that game because they are the ones with the more employable skills, hence why they can leave in the first place.
The people who stay are those that are stuck, and can't get jobs somewhere else.
Edit : speeling and gramarr.
Yeah I think it’s a bad option for bad times. I’ve never been in the CEO chair through something like this so I wonder if there’s more to it somehow.