Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Let's quit calling forced terminations 'Layoffs'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 04:52 PM
Original message
Let's quit calling forced terminations 'Layoffs'
Layoffs come when temporary slowdowns in demand require temporary halts or slowdowns in production. Layoffs come to an end and employees are called back to work. That's not what we have today. When an employee gets the pink slip today its permanent, there is no callback, in fact it many cases there will be no plant and equipment to be called back to, no management left to make the call. Closings are complete and permanent, equipment and tooling is shipped off to foreign lands and foreign hands or to the scrap yard for exportable metal.

What we have today are forced terminations. Many, and you may expect more, come with little notice and ignore contractual obligations to pay for accrued benefits like vacation pay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. I agree with you but there should be some third phrase
Because people shouldn't be classified as "fired" if they were doing a good job and the job simply ended.

The word "Bushed" comes to mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Unhappily you could apply that term to so many things. Iraq, Afganistan,
the economy, spying on US citizens, you name it he did it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadinMo Donating Member (519 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. Riffed
Reduction In Forces
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike 03 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
2. Well, having been layed off when I was just out of college and working in the auto insurance
industry, I would rather be able to say I was laid off than "fired." Nobody wants to say "I was fired" from my job. I had fantastic job performance grades. They just didn't need a typist anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tangerine LaBamba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
3. Terminated
That's what it is. Not fired, not laid off. Terminated. Ended. Finis. Over. So long. Go home. Party's over. You got nothing. Thanks for the memories. Buh-bye.

It's going to get so much worse. That's what frightens and saddens me. We ain't seen nothing yet.

But, this bunch of thugs squatting the Oval Office have done a marvelous job of corrupting words and their meanings, and sending people through the looking glass without blinking.

Consider The "Clear Skies" Act, which did nothing but increase pollution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike 03 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Yeah, That is Good. How about, "Terminated for reasons other than my performance,"
or something like that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. How about "Terminated due to the Bush economy."
That explains it all. And it places the blame fully where it belongs. Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. What do you call it when a Republican gets "laid off"? DeBushification
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Anonymous-Thoughts Donating Member (6 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
8. Unemployment
Unemployment numbers are way off. They do not include the numbers for people that were never yet employed or self-employed. It would be several percentages higher if these were calculated in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Manifestor_of_Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Yes.
I wonder what the REAL unemployment numbers are?

Older educated workers who were laid off a long time ago, have stopped looking for another job, and don't qualify for unemployment, for example?

Probably at least twice the percentage, or more, of what they are saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NutmegYankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
10. In Government, it's known as RIF.
Reduction in Force - and is dreaded by teachers and civil servants alike.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lifesbeautifulmagic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
12. yes you are completely correct
Edited on Thu Dec-11-08 11:31 PM by brandnewlaptop
Starbucks had job cuts, and then hired contract labor with no benefits to replace, at their corp office. The eliminated workers were long term employees, over 15 years, that were tossed out like so much trash. In the worst job market in my lifetime.

Starbucks had the nerve to call them layoffs. Big story in the Seattle press about the Starbucks "layoffs". And then Howard Schultz had the nerve to write about "corporate responsibility" in huff post.

edited for clarity, and because I am pissed about this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 02:28 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC