Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => Anσnymσus Posts Allowed => Topic started by: Änσnymσus on January 11, 2024, 10:51:33 AM

Title: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 11, 2024, 10:51:33 AM
My company is in Round 3 of a RIF (reduction in force) and it's 35% across the org.  I received a weird meeting invite from a VP entitled "Organization Update" and the invitee list is hidden so I don't know if I'm the only one invited or not.  Can't forward it either.  

I'm feeling nervous because I'm over 50 and I've heard it's very difficult for older workers to get jobs.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 11, 2024, 10:55:29 AM
I may be in a similar situation soon.  Millions will be.  All over the country.  Big companies know the economy is going to shrink and they will cut jobs to save their bottom-line.  

God has a plan.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Yeti on January 11, 2024, 12:03:02 PM
Does this mean a recession is beginning?
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 11, 2024, 12:20:07 PM
Does this mean a recession is beginning?

I think we're past recession and probably ramping up into a full-blown depression.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 11, 2024, 12:23:08 PM
I've been in your boat, OP, and, yes, it's harder to find a job when you're in your 50s.  Employers tend to think that such employees would have less enthusiasm this late in their careers and might just be looking to coast into retirement.  I'll pray for you, because it's not a great spot to be in.  And it's harder now precisely because of all the companies laying off due to the general economy, where you're competing with a lot of people for the jobs that are let, kindof like in a game of musical chairs.

Happened to me when I worked as an Architect at a big bank during the 2008 financial crisis, where my bank totally collapsed, we got transitioned to a bank that bought us, and then we were laid off due to our being redundant staff with the other bank (they just wanted the accounts and branches, and not the IT systems, since they already had those).  Thankfully it took them nearly 2 years to sort it all out, and then after that they gave us a one-year severance ... which gave me enough time to find a job.  And I was only about 40 when that happened, so I didn't have the age issue to content with.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 11, 2024, 01:14:50 PM
OP here:  My position has been eliminated and I received my 60 day notice.  I will receive severance + bonus and job search assistance.  It's a group Zoom firing.  They said it's because they want to keep profits high.  I'm totally disgusted.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 11, 2024, 01:39:04 PM
OP here:  My position has been eliminated and I received my 60 day notice.  I will receive severance + bonus and job search assistance.  It's a group Zoom firing.  They said it's because they want to keep profits high.  I'm totally disgusted.

Sorry about that.  At least they gave you 60 days and a severance + bonus.  That buys you some time.  Many companies would have told you just to pack your belongings and escorted you out of the building.  Of course, it's always about keeping "profits high".  And they offer the notice probably by law (some states require it if you're laying off more than N number of people at the same time), and the severance + bonus to keep people from lashing out, sabotaging things, and for PR purposes ... not from the kindness of their hearts.

By the time your 60 days and severance/bonus run out, we could all be in the same boat with a full economic collapse.  You could probably use that time to maybe go to daily Mass, etc. while you're looking for work.  God allowed it to happen for a reason.  Usually in that 60-day "lame duck" period, they're not expecting a lot of productivity out of you and so you can probably show up late, leave early, work from home more, etc.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Miseremini on January 11, 2024, 02:16:27 PM
Usually in that 60-day "lame duck" period, they're not expecting a lot of productivity out of you and so you can probably show up late, leave early, work from home more, etc.
Are you seriously encouraging him to commit a sin of robbing his employer of the time/service he is being paid for???
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Matthew on January 11, 2024, 02:21:03 PM
OP, could you describe your job duties?

I'm just curious what jobs are not safe, what jobs don't offer enough benefit to a company, etc.
I have children who are approaching "working age" so this isn't just idle curiosity on my part.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 11, 2024, 02:29:14 PM
Are you seriously encouraging him to commit a sin of robbing his employer of the time/service he is being paid for???

Give if a rest.  As I said, the employer is not expecting any productivity during those 60 days.  It's offered to appease the wrath of the laid-off workforce and for PR reasons, and most employees are salaried (aka "exempt") so there's no expectation of putting in 40 hours.  They often require you to work more than 40 under the terms of exempt employment, but the downside for them is that they also can't require employees to work 40 to get their full pay.  You evidently have no understanding of corporate employment.  They'll expect you to work 50-60 hours per week without paying OT under that kind of employment, but then can't force you to work 40 when things are slow.  It's not hourly employment.  And, even if it were for OP, there's no expectation whatsoever for full productivity during the lame duck timeframe except possibly to do knowledge transfer of your job duties, if applicable.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 11, 2024, 02:43:24 PM
Are you seriously encouraging him to commit a sin of robbing his employer of the time/service he is being paid for???
Chill.  My boss already told me I basically don't have to do anything for the next 60 days.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 11, 2024, 02:44:52 PM
OP, could you describe your job duties?

I'm just curious what jobs are not safe, what jobs don't offer enough benefit to a company, etc.
I have children who are approaching "working age" so this isn't just idle curiosity on my part.
Tech project mgmt. 25 yrs exp.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 11, 2024, 02:45:46 PM
Give if a rest.  As I said, the employer is not expecting any productivity during those 60 days.  It's offered to appease the wrath of the laid-off workforce and for PR reasons, and most employees are salaried (aka "exempt") so there's no expectation of putting in 40 hours.  They often require you to work more than 40 under the terms of exempt employment, but the downside for them is that they also can't require employees to work 40 to get their full pay.  You evidently have no understanding of corporate employment.  They'll expect you to work 50-60 hours per week without paying OT under that kind of employment, but then can't force you to work 40 when things are slow.  It's not hourly employment.  And, even if it were for OP, there's no expectation whatsoever for full productivity during the lame duck timeframe except possibly to do knowledge transfer of your job duties, if applicable.
It's tech so....yeah.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Matthew on January 11, 2024, 03:06:11 PM
Managers are inherently middlemen -- they aren't doing any direct work which earns the company money. So there's always a danger.

The company I work for is in the telecom industry. In California no less. The company is doing great, making lots of money (upgrading/installing equipment at cell sites). They have a fleet of techs who do the actual work.

But they have several "project managers" whose main work is to give/receive e-mails and update a spreadsheet. They also have "schedulers" who schedule where the techs will work each day.

There is tons of inefficiency and lost money (stolen by employees, fines for keeping equipment too long, repeat trips to sites that didn't need to happen, etc.) so their answer? Software. That's where I come in.

Myself and a few others in a low-cost area of the country (Texas) are writing software that's going to streamline, automate, and allow the company to cut all kinds of management jobs (especially project managers, job schedulers, etc.) because those jobs will be completely redundant after our software is fully complete.

That's why I tell everyone who will listen: make sure you do real work, offer real value, in whatever career you choose. Sure, there are "cushy" jobs where you seem to do little or nothing. OR let's say you're not lazy -- but your job is mind-numbingly boring and seems like a computer could do it -- both quicker and better. Either way, make no mistake: you're on borrowed time. The time will come when they DISCOVER how little you do, and/or how easily you could be replaced by a robot or computer.

Then you're toast.

So young people: pick careers where you can't be replaced. Something where you do REAL WORK that benefits a company. Something in-person. Something that requires human/rational skill. And so forth.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on January 11, 2024, 05:09:45 PM
Are you seriously encouraging him to commit a sin of robbing his employer of the time/service he is being paid for???


Yes, I agree.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: 2Vermont on January 11, 2024, 05:11:25 PM
OP here:  My position has been eliminated and I received my 60 day notice.  I will receive severance + bonus and job search assistance.  It's a group Zoom firing.  They said it's because they want to keep profits high.  I'm totally disgusted.
Sorry OP.  Your OP did sound like this was exactly what was going to happen.  That hidden invitee list was suspect.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on January 11, 2024, 05:11:50 PM
Give if a rest.  As I said, the employer is not expecting any productivity during those 60 days.  It's offered to appease the wrath of the laid-off workforce and for PR reasons, and most employees are salaried (aka "exempt") so there's no expectation of putting in 40 hours.  They often require you to work more than 40 under the terms of exempt employment, but the downside for them is that they also can't require employees to work 40 to get their full pay.  You evidently have no understanding of corporate employment.  They'll expect you to work 50-60 hours per week without paying OT under that kind of employment, but then can't force you to work 40 when things are slow.  It's not hourly employment.  And, even if it were for OP, there's no expectation whatsoever for full productivity during the lame duck timeframe except possibly to do knowledge transfer of your job duties, if applicable.


You have a point.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 11, 2024, 05:26:28 PM
OP here:  Have confirmed I am to not do any work for the next 60 days but look for a new job.  

What was so disturbing is that many people received the weird hidden list Zoom invite and chat/video was disabled.  Managers know who was let go but can't say because of privacy laws. It was surreal.  Tomorrow the new org chart is being emailed out so everyone will know who got laid off.  What a cluster.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 11, 2024, 05:36:33 PM
How about being an undertaker?  Something in the funeral industry that doesn’t involve cremations, cryogenics, or turning people to fertilizer?  
What can’t robots be programmed to do?  
Are there any jobs that aren’t somehow connected to immorality?  
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 11, 2024, 05:41:44 PM
Ite ad Ioseph, OP. 
Will remember you in my prayers. :pray:

(https://catholicharboroffaithandmorals.com/St. Joseph Litany Title.jpg)


Lord, have mercy.
 Christ, have mercy.
 Lord, have mercy.
 Christ, hear us.
 Christ, graciously hear us.

 God, the Father of Heaven, have mercy on us.
 God the Son, Redeemer of the world, have mercy on us.
 God the Holy Ghost, have mercy on us.
 Holy Trinity, One God, have mercy on us.

 Holy Mary, Pray for us.*
 St. Joseph, *
 Renowned offspring of David, *
 Light of Patriarchs, *
 Spouse of the Mother of God, *
 Chaste guardian of the Virgin, *
 Foster father of the Son of God, *
 Diligent protector of Christ, *
 Head of the Holy Family, *
 Joseph most just, *
 Joseph most chaste, *
 Joseph most prudent, *
 Joseph most strong, *
 Joseph most obedient, *
 Joseph most faithful, *
 Mirror of patience, *
 Lover of poverty, *
 Model of artisans, *
 Glory of home life, *
 Guardian of virgins, *
 Pillar of families, *
 Solace of the wretched, *
 Hope of the sick, *
 Patron of the dying, *
 Terror of demons, *
 Protector of Holy Church, *

 Lamb of God, Who takest away the sins of the world,
 Spare us, O Lord!.
 Lamb of God, Who takest away the sins of the world,
 Graciously hear us, O Lord!
 Lamb of God, Who takest away the sins of the world,
 Have mercy on us.


 V. He made him the lord of His household.
 R. And prince over all His possessions.

 Let us pray:

O God, in your ineffable providence didst vouchsafe to choose Blessed Joseph to be the spouse of your most holy Mother; grant, we beseech Thee, that we may be worthy to have him for our intercessor in heaven whom we venerate as our Protector on earth: Who livest and reignest forever and ever. Amen.





Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 11, 2024, 06:37:54 PM
OP here:  Have confirmed I am to not do any work for the next 60 days but look for a new job. 

Called it.  I've been through these before.  When they give you advance notice, it's usually for legal reasons (some states requires it for large layoffs) and to not enrage the people laid off even more and for PR purposes.  As I said before, you can use the time to go to daily Mass, pray more (make a 15-decade Rosary novena for a new job and for your family), etc. ... while also looking for a new job.  God allowed it to happen for a reason.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 11, 2024, 06:39:52 PM
Tech project mgmt. 25 yrs exp.

Ah, too bad.  My company just laid off a couple PMs (largely because they were incompetent).  Pretty much everyone at my company works remote these days, so it wouldn't matter where you live.  I can check around.  I think they could probably use some more PMs, but they let the ones go because they were, quite frankly, completely inept.  If I hear about any openings, I'll send you a PM ... LOL a PM about PM openings.  We could actually use good technical PMs ... with the non-technical parts being a huge part of why these failed (that and just sheer incompetence in other areas).  We also have several large customers who may be in need of PMs, so I'll ask them also.  I have good connections with many of them (they like me for a number of reasons), so if there's something out available, I'll find it.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 11, 2024, 06:49:02 PM
But they have several "project managers" whose main work is to give/receive e-mails and update a spreadsheet. They also have "schedulers" who schedule where the techs will work each day.

There is tons of inefficiency and lost money (stolen by employees, fines for keeping equipment too long, repeat trips to sites that didn't need to happen, etc.) so their answer? Software. That's where I come in.

Here's the thing.  When I worked for a couple large banks, the competent TPMs actually resulted in a huge boost in productivity.  They took a lot of organization tasks off the Architects and the Developers that then freed them up to be more productive in focusing on the actual work they needed to do.  As Architects / Developers, we could be writing software instead of putting in Change Controls, managing schedule/cost, acquiring additional resources, etc.  I had a couple I worked with that earned every cent they were paid.  Now, the non-technical PMs, yikes, some of those actually increased my workload by 25%.  I could go on for hours with stories about those guys.  Yes, for smaller organizations, PMs are not a boost, but for larger operations, they can be invaluable, especially TPMs (technical PMs).
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 11, 2024, 06:51:59 PM

Yes, I agree.

"Exempt" employees have it written in their contracts that they were not paid hourly (which is most tech employees). Most of the time this translates into benefit for the employer, where they can get 50-60 hours out of you per week without having to pay overtime, but if you're slow and have less work, you also get paid full salary even if you work 10-20 hours per week.  That's one reason employers deliberately understaff, knowing they can squeeze an extra 10-20 hours out of many employees.  But the way those contracts are written, they have to pay you your "salary" whether you work 10 hours or 60 hours.  Corporate work is not clock-punching where you get paid by the hour ... well, except in some cases for certain types of employees.

And, as OP has since confirmed, they're not expected to work during these 60 days.  That's usually what happens with the mass layoffs.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 11, 2024, 07:03:52 PM
Here's a good query on Indeed for Remote Technical Project Managers, and of course you can check in your area as well.

https://www.indeed.com/jobs?q=%22technical+project+manager%22&l=%22remote%22&vjk=2f50b0e3fb101386

Also, you may wish to consider whether you could relocate ... might even improve your situation in terms of access to the Sacraments.  Or if you can land a Remote position, you might be able to stay closer to your family.

You could also drop the "Technical" part (though those usually pay less).
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on January 11, 2024, 08:19:05 PM
"Exempt" employees have it written in their contracts that they were not paid hourly (which is most tech employees). Most of the time this translates into benefit for the employer, where they can get 50-60 hours out of you per week without having to pay overtime, but if you're slow and have less work, you also get paid full salary even if you work 10-20 hours per week.  That's one reason employers deliberately understaff, knowing they can squeeze an extra 10-20 hours out of many employees.  But the way those contracts are written, they have to pay you your "salary" whether you work 10 hours or 60 hours.  Corporate work is not clock-punching where you get paid by the hour ... well, except in some cases for certain types of employees.

And, as OP has since confirmed, they're not expected to work during these 60 days.  That's usually what happens with the mass layoffs.

I stand corrected. Fortunately I’ve never had to work for a corporation.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: SimpleMan on January 11, 2024, 09:41:03 PM
My advice would be, put in an honest day's work for an honest day's pay, but don't bust your hump.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: MaterDominici on January 11, 2024, 11:18:44 PM
Fortunately I’ve never had to work for a corporation.
I don't think it would be far-fetched to have a study out there somewhere showing a direct relationship between the size of a company and the dissatisfaction of their workforce.

OP, prayers that you'll find a new job quickly. :pray:
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 12, 2024, 06:21:17 AM
My advice would be, put in an honest day's work for an honest day's pay, but don't bust your hump.

Except that his boss just told him they're not expecting him to work, only to be looking for a new job during the entire 60 days remaining.  That implies that they won't be assigning him any work to do.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: 2Vermont on January 12, 2024, 06:24:07 AM
My advice would be, put in an honest day's work for an honest day's pay, but don't bust your hump.
I think this is good advice.  If for no other reason than to make it much more likely that they will give you a good reference.  Even if they said you don't have to do anything for the next 60 days.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 12, 2024, 06:25:33 AM
I don't think it would be far-fetched to have a study out there somewhere showing a direct relationship between the size of a company and the dissatisfaction of their workforce.

OP, prayers that you'll find a new job quickly. :pray:

I think it varies.  I've been in small companies, where things can get really bad since you only need one or two bad apples to pollute the entire work "culture", whereas in a large corporation it's easier to remain aloof.  Also, it would depend on the structure of an organization.  I currently work for a company that employs somewhere between 5,000-10,000 people, but the people I work with on a daily basis are about a half dozen, with occasional contact with another dozen or so ... so it's almost like a small business within a larger corporate framework.  I was at one small company where a couple of individuals were engaged in adultery/fornication and not really hiding it, making the entire situation toxic.  In a large corporation, you would just ignore these individuals and go off and do your thing without too much interaction with these others, where in a smaller corporation you're constantly engaged with these types.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 12, 2024, 06:29:14 AM
I think this is good advice.  If for no other reason than to make it much more likely that they will give you a good reference.  Even if they said you don't have to do anything for the next 60 days.

That won't make any difference in terms of "references".  If his boss isn't assigning him any work, there's no work for him to do.  TPMs have to be assigned to projects.  If he's not assigned to a project, there's no work for him to do.  He may need to transition his projects to others (do some knowledge transfer), but if they're laying off TPMs, they're probably going more to a self-managed (scrum/agile) scenario where the remaining project members will just self-manage, and they already have the requisite knowledge to keep it moving.

I was actually on 2-3 projects which had a PM on them who was dismissed from the company.  We simply carried on without a Project Manager, since we just filled the gap that was left ourselves.  We know more about the details of what needed to get done, when, etc. than the PM did.

I think that people are misunderstanding the nature of this work.  It's not like working in a factor or an assembly line or doing other "concrete" work.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: 2Vermont on January 12, 2024, 06:34:27 AM
That won't make any difference in terms of "references".  If his boss isn't assigning him any work, there's no work for him to do.  TPMs have to be assigned to projects.  If he's not assigned to a project, there's no work for him to do.  He may need to transition his projects to others (do some knowledge transfer), but if they're laying off TPMs, they're probably going more to a self-managed (scrum/agile) scenario where the remaining project members will just self-manage, and they already have the requisite knowledge to keep it moving.

I was actually on 2-3 projects which had a PM on them who was dismissed from the company.  We simply carried on without a Project Manager, since we just filled the gap that was left ourselves.  We know more about the details of what needed to get done, when, etc. than the PM did.

I think that people are misunderstanding the nature of this work.  It's not like working in a factor or an assembly line or doing other "concrete" work.
Then I'll just say that there is probably a decent middle ground between walking in late, leaving early, wasting time during the day and keeping his nose to the grindstone. 
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 12, 2024, 06:58:01 AM
Then I'll just say that there is probably a decent middle ground between walking in late, leaving early, wasting time during the day and keeping his nose to the grindstone.

Nope.  Even work hours are fluid for exempt employees.  There's no 9 to 5 clock punching.  People here have no understanding of how corporate jobs work.  OP should take advantage of the situation to go to Mass, even if it means arriving "late" to work.  In most corporations don't have a set "start" or "end" time.  Sometimes you start at 6/7 AM and/or leave at 6/7PM, and at other times (by way of comping people for the regular need to work early/late) you can show up at 10/11 and/or leave at 3/4.  If you have a Dr. appointment or some other personal errand to run, etc., you just do it, provided that it doesn't get in the way of meeting that you need to attend.  I love it how people who have no understanding of corporate work environments are rendering these edicts.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: 2Vermont on January 12, 2024, 07:08:11 AM
OK, Ladislaus.  You are right. But aren't you always? Interesting that even trying to meet you halfway wasn't good enough.

Btw, I was once a "corporate" employee.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 07:24:39 AM
OP here:  I hope this is my last update and please read carefully.

My job was ELIMINATED.  My job does not exist as of TODAY.  I have no job to do and I have been instructed by my manager and my RTE both to not do any work because my job was eliminated.  There is no work because I have no role anymore.  I am no longer in the org chart.  For those hard of understanding, quit suggesting I continue to go in and perform busy work tasks to look productive.  That is real theft right there.  I am a remote tech worker so there's no office to go and sit in a cubicle for 8 hours twiddling my thumbs.  I have been instructed to not attend any more of my team's meetings because my team no longer exists.  This isn't the IGA where I can just go in and hope they assign me sweeping the parking lot so that the bossman gives me a good reference.  Do you people understand in corporate tech you don't even use references?  The name recognition alone is your reference.  My resume is stacked with Fortune 100 companies and certifications.  I don't use references.  Please get into the 20th century.  One does not simply go become a mortician after investing 30 years in a career that pays $145K a year.  I will get another job because my certifications are highly sought after.  Now that tech is having layoffs, contract work will be more available and I will possibly make a third more in my hourly rate anyway.  

I'm just letting people know that layoffs are happening in healthcare and it's going to trickle down.  Most of the people my company laid off were NURSES.  Get ready for longer waiting times in hospitals and clinics.  The cause of the RIFs was the federal government is reimbursing less for Medicare 2024.  This will affect many retirees on Medicare because claims are being denied at a higher rate and they are using AI to process and deny the claims.  All the insurance companies are doing it so don't think it's isolated.

I am being paid for an additional 60 days because that is the law in my state for companies 100+.  We are also a huge government contractor so regulations out the wazzoo.  

Hope this clears up misconceptions.  It's probably best that people who have no experience in this situation not comment because you embarrass yourself with your ignorance.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: 2Vermont on January 12, 2024, 07:37:54 AM
OP here:  I hope this is my last update and please read carefully.

My job was ELIMINATED.  My job does not exist as of TODAY.  I have no job to do and I have been instructed by my manager and my RTE both to not do any work because my job was eliminated.  There is no work because I have no role anymore.  I am no longer in the org chart.  For those hard of understanding, quit suggesting I continue to go in and perform busy work tasks to look productive.  That is real theft right there.  I am a remote tech worker so there's no office to go and sit in a cubicle for 8 hours twiddling my thumbs.  I have been instructed to not attend any more of my team's meetings because my team no longer exists. This isn't the IGA where I can just go in and hope they assign me sweeping the parking lot so that the bossman gives me a good reference.  Do you people understand in corporate tech you don't even use references?  The name recognition alone is your reference.  My resume is stacked with Fortune 100 companies and certifications.  I don't use references.  Please get into the 20th century.  One does not simply go become a mortician after investing 30 years in a career that pays $145K a year.  I will get another job because my certifications are highly sought after.  Now that tech is having layoffs, contract work will be more available and I will possibly make a third more in my hourly rate anyway. 

I'm just letting people know that layoffs are happening in healthcare and it's going to trickle down.  Most of the people my company laid off were NURSES.  Get ready for longer waiting times in hospitals and clinics.  The cause of the RIFs was the federal government is reimbursing less for Medicare 2024.  This will affect many retirees on Medicare because claims are being denied at a higher rate and they are using AI to process and deny the claims.  All the insurance companies are doing it so don't think it's isolated.

I am being paid for an additional 60 days because that is the law in my state for companies 100+.  We are also a huge government contractor so regulations out the wazzoo. 

Hope this clears up misconceptions.  It's probably best that people who have no experience in this situation not comment because you embarrass yourself with your ignorance.
It sure has.  I'm sorry I tried to offer you support/guidance.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on January 12, 2024, 07:47:34 AM
OP here:  I hope this is my last update and please read carefully.

It's probably best that people who have no experience in this situation not comment because you embarrass yourself with your ignorance.


Was this really necessary? :facepalm:
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 07:48:01 AM

Was this really necessary? :facepalm:
In this case, yes.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on January 12, 2024, 08:03:44 AM
OP here:  My position has been eliminated and I received my 60 day notice.  I will receive severance + bonus and job search assistance.  It's a group Zoom firing.  They said it's because they want to keep profits high.  I'm totally disgusted.
I am sorry to hear this.  It’s happening everywhere in every industry.  

It is disgusting when employers put profit over people.  It is heartless to fire people in zoom.  

I remember when it happened to me years ago.  I took it personally.  Know it’s not you and something better is coming for you.  



Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 08:05:08 AM
Quote
I think this is good advice.  If for no other reason than to make it much more likely that they will give you a good reference.  Even if they said you don't have to do anything for the next 60 days.
The 60 days notice is a benefit to the employee so they have time to find another job.  With bigger companies, internal HR often helps you job hunt within the company.  

Typically, there is some expectation that the employee will docuмent processes that are important, that must be done even when he's gone.  Outside of this, the expectation from the employer is that the fired person will be spending the 60 days job hunting.

I've been through this multiple times.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 08:10:14 AM

Quote
I'm just letting people know that layoffs are happening in healthcare and it's going to trickle down.
Thanks.  I'm also in healthcare and there's a wave of RIFs going on for these last 3 days, each one under 100 people, so they don't have to report it.  In the grand scheme of things, 300 people being let go is small, considering Oct/Nov were the major downsizing times, with hundreds of people fired and also many too early retirement.


This type of thing is happening all over the country.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 08:41:00 AM
We need to bring back traditional Catholic healthcare with traditional quiet prayer nun nurses and sound faithful Christian doctors.  

Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 09:01:10 AM
[color=var(--wpds-colors-gray20)]Palm Springs looks to give trans residents monthly cash payments……[/color]
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 09:06:43 AM
Too many good medical staff forced out of medical field for not getting vax. 

In our area, there are many unqualified people working in the medical field.  

Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: 2Vermont on January 12, 2024, 09:07:54 AM

Was this really necessary? :facepalm:
Thank you.  Even when I try to stick to less controversial topics and try to be helpful, I can't seem to win.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 09:10:52 AM

Quote
Thank you.  Even when I try to stick to less controversial topics and try to be helpful, I can't seem to win.
If you give people advice in areas beyond your experience, then you aren't being helpful.  Bad advice, even if given in charity, is still bad advice.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: 2Vermont on January 12, 2024, 09:18:26 AM
If you give people advice in areas beyond your experience, then you aren't being helpful.  Bad advice, even if given in charity, is still bad advice.
Well then, I guess most of us shouldn't even bother trying to help since most of us are probably not experienced in most of the anonymous threads posted here.  The OP was obnoxious in his last post.  Where was the charity there?    
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 12, 2024, 11:40:23 AM
Was this really necessary? :facepalm:

Absolutely.  When I was slanderously accused of encouraging someone to defraud an employer, it became necessary.  I had to explain how these 60-day notice periods work, how exempt employment works, and how corporations work in general ... and you still had people who are completely ignorant of the matter doubling down.  This thread was derailed by the initial slanderous accusation made by someone without any knowledge of the situation, thus turning the thread into a "controversial" one.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 11:42:58 AM
Well then, I guess most of us shouldn't even bother trying to help since most of us are probably not experienced in most of the anonymous threads posted here.  The OP was obnoxious in his last post.  Where was the charity there?   

That's why I mostly stopped bothering to comment on most topics.  It seems to me that most posters merely want affirmation of their own opinions and can't stand any criticisms or comments that aren't 100% in line with their own.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on January 12, 2024, 11:55:10 AM
Absolutely.  When I was slanderously accused of encouraging someone to defraud an employer, it became necessary.  I had to explain how these 60-day notice periods work, how exempt employment works, and how corporations work in general ... and you still had people who are completely ignorant of the matter doubling down.  This thread was derailed by the initial slanderous accusation made by someone without any knowledge of the situation, thus turning the thread into a "controversial" one.


Well Lad, here is what you wrote: “Usually in that 60-day "lame duck" period, they're not expecting a lot of productivity out of you and so you can probably show up late, leave early, work from home more, etc.”

If you were a bit more descriptive, explaining how the system worked initially, I don’t think any of us would have taken your post in a bad light. You must admit that without your follow up posts and confirmation from the OP, it does look bit scandalous.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 12:06:42 PM

Well Lad, here is what you wrote: “Usually in that 60-day "lame duck" period, they're not expecting a lot of productivity out of you and so you can probably show up late, leave early, work from home more, etc.”

If you were a bit more descriptive, explaining how the system worked initially, I don’t think any of us would have taken your post in a bad light. You must admit that without your follow up posts and confirmation from the OP, it does look bit scandalous.
I thought your question "was this necessary?" was meant for the OP.  
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: 2Vermont on January 12, 2024, 12:14:52 PM
Absolutely.  When I was slanderously accused of encouraging someone to defraud an employer, it became necessary.  I had to explain how these 60-day notice periods work, how exempt employment works, and how corporations work in general ... and you still had people who are completely ignorant of the matter doubling down.  This thread was derailed by the initial slanderous accusation made by someone without any knowledge of the situation, thus turning the thread into a "controversial" one.
No, this thread was never "controversial"...only to you.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 12, 2024, 12:26:21 PM
No, this thread was never "controversial"...only to you.

You're the one who used the term.  See your own post above.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: 2Vermont on January 12, 2024, 12:40:21 PM
You're the one who used the term.  See your own post above.
Not in reference to this thread. My point was I have been trying to take part in the less controversial threads on this forum.  In other words, one like this one that isn't controversial.  It was simply an anonymous thread where the OP was asking for support/advice, etc. about losing his job ....NOT controversial.  Of course, later on the OP came across as an arrogant, anonymous jerk.  Maybe there's more to his story.

Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 12:46:41 PM
It was simply an anonymous thread where the OP was asking for support/advice, etc. about losing his job .
Please quote my request for support/advice.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: 2Vermont on January 12, 2024, 01:00:15 PM
Please quote my request for support/advice.
You're right. You never asked explicitly.  You only wrote this in the OP:

I'm feeling nervous because I'm over 50 and I've heard it's very difficult for older workers to get jobs.

And the rest of us idiots who felt badly for you chimed in, gave some ideas, said we'd pray for you, etc ,etc but then you showed us!:

Do you people understand in corporate tech you don't even use references?  The name recognition alone is your reference.  My resume is stacked with Fortune 100 companies and certifications.  I don't use references.  Please get into the 20th century.  One does not simply go become a mortician after investing 30 years in a career that pays $145K a year.  I will get another job because my certifications are highly sought after. Now that tech is having layoffs, contract work will be more available and I will possibly make a third more in my hourly rate anyway.


So, now you're showing that you're NOT nervous about getting another job.  MMMkay.  Good luck and good riddance.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 01:05:26 PM
You're right. You never asked explicitly.  You only wrote this in the OP:

I'm feeling nervous because I'm over 50 and I've heard it's very difficult for older workers to get jobs.

And the rest of us idiots who felt badly for you chimed in, gave some ideas, said we'd pray for you, etc ,etc but then you showed us!:

Do you people understand in corporate tech you don't even use references?  The name recognition alone is your reference.  My resume is stacked with Fortune 100 companies and certifications.  I don't use references.  Please get into the 20th century.  One does not simply go become a mortician after investing 30 years in a career that pays $145K a year.  I will get another job because my certifications are highly sought after. Now that tech is having layoffs, contract work will be more available and I will possibly make a third more in my hourly rate anyway.

So, now you're showing that you're NOT nervous about getting another job.  MMMkay.  Good luck and good riddance.
Heck, the OP is filthy rich to boot having made $4.35 million in her career, she really doesn't even need another job.:fryingpan: 
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on January 12, 2024, 01:44:36 PM
I thought your question "was this necessary?" was meant for the OP. 

It was, but the other reply was to Lad. The whole thing is being blown way out of proportion. The OP was being rude to Vermont for no reason. 
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Nadir on January 12, 2024, 02:49:15 PM

Quote
OP said: Please get into the 20th century. 
You do know, don't you, that we are now in the 21st century.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 12, 2024, 03:12:18 PM
Heck, the OP is filthy rich to boot having made $4.35 million in her career, she really doesn't even need another job.:fryingpan:

Nonsense.  You act as if 1) that money is tax-free and 2) the individual has no expenses.  Depending on where you live, how many children you have, etc. ... one is not necessarily "filthy rich" from $145K per year.  That's nothing in a place like California, where a tiny 3-bed 1-bath home can cost close to a million dollars.  You can't make that judgment without any additional knowledge other than base salary.  Not to mention, that's probably a reflection of OP's current salary, and salaries have been rising with inflation, so I would imagine that the average over 30 years was more like $75-$100K tops.  30 years ago, PMs were lucky to make $30K entry level.  I started as an entry-level developer myself about 25 years ago now, and I was making $30K at the time.  Took me several years before I got into the mid-$50K range, etc. etc.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 04:42:34 PM
Heck, the OP is filthy rich to boot having made $4.35 million in her career, she really doesn't even need another job.:fryingpan:

How to say "I still live with Mom and Dad" without saying "I still live with Mom and Dad".
You do know how real life works, don't you? Have you ever supported yourself, even for as little as 6 months? I'm guessing not.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 05:54:38 PM
Actually, OP could have retired early with that income and number of years working. It's called reducing your living expenses. 
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 12, 2024, 06:17:53 PM
Actually, OP could have retired early with that income and number of years working. It's called reducing your living expenses.

You know absolutely nothing of OP's expenses, cost of living (can change dramatically depending on which part of the country you live in), number of children, possible medical issues, caring for elderly parents (contributing to them financially) ... and have not factored in that the 145K salary was not consistent for the 30 years, and 30 years ago was probably closer to 30K, perhaps averaging 75-100K over the years, not counting taxes, which would chew up a significant part of that.  You have a real problem here making snap judgments while knowing almost nothing about OP's situation.

For all you know, OP could live in California, where decent homes cost a million dollars, have 12 children, 6 of whom are in college, and need automobiles, having to pay large medical bills that weren't covered by college, and paying for the care of parents who may need medical or nursing care.  In other words, you know zilch and are making snap judgments.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 12, 2024, 06:18:56 PM
How to say "I still live with Mom and Dad" without saying "I still live with Mom and Dad".
You do know how real life works, don't you? Have you ever supported yourself, even for as little as 6 months? I'm guessing not.

And I'm guessing being motivated by jealousy regarding the salary (which OP should probably not have revealed).
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 06:48:27 PM
Myself and a few others in a low-cost area of the country (Texas) are writing software that's going to streamline, automate, and allow the company to cut all kinds of management jobs (especially project managers, job schedulers, etc.) because those jobs will be completely redundant after our software is fully complete.
Does this have anything to do with smartcontracts?
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Nadir on January 12, 2024, 07:00:16 PM
And I'm guessing being motivated by jealousy regarding the salary (which OP should probably not have revealed).
So Blabbermouth needs you to defend his indiscretion. Of course, there is altogether too much guessing, and now you are guessing the motives of one anonymous joker.  This thread should disappear out of sight.

Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 12, 2024, 09:15:55 PM
So Blabbermouth needs you to defend his indiscretion. Of course, there is altogether too much guessing, and now you are guessing the motives of one anonymous joker.  This thread should disappear out of sight.

Anyone who's capable of English comprehension can see the envy/jealousy in the repeated taunts about OP's salary.  There's very little guesswork involved.  But many individuals here lack basic reading comprehension skills.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 12, 2024, 10:22:35 PM
Anyone who's capable of English comprehension can see the envy/jealousy in the repeated taunts about OP's salary.  There's very little guesswork involved.  But many individuals here lack basic reading comprehension skills.
Now that's the funniest thing I've read on this thread yet.  Talk about other's comprehension when you get snarky when people give a Catholic response to what you wrote because you couldn't articulate what you meant.
 You wrote:
"go in late"... can only mean to leave your place and advance elsewhere
"go in late"... can only mean there was an expected/anticipated time of arrival
"leave early ... can only mean leave place of employment before expected/usual time
 


Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 06:07:00 AM
Nonsense.  You act as if 1) that money is tax-free and 2) the individual has no expenses.  Depending on where you live, how many children you have, etc. ... one is not necessarily "filthy rich" from $145K per year.  That's nothing in a place like California, where a tiny 3-bed 1-bath home can cost close to a million dollars.  You can't make that judgment without any additional knowledge other than base salary.  Not to mention, that's probably a reflection of OP's current salary, and salaries have been rising with inflation, so I would imagine that the average over 30 years was more like $75-$100K tops.  30 years ago, PMs were lucky to make $30K entry level.  I started as an entry-level developer myself about 25 years ago now, and I was making $30K at the time.  Took me several years before I got into the mid-$50K range, etc. etc.
Well you're not as special as the OP who is obviously not only legendarily talented, but also rich from such a high paying job and could retire now on the $4.35 million. The op would however need to budget to live on $145k / year for the next 30 years! If he's still alive after that well who knows? Heck, the OP would never have to worry about making ends meet on meager social security checks every month. I mean, how much money does the OP need anyway? Retire already!

 
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 10:42:23 AM
You know absolutely nothing of OP's expenses, cost of living (can change dramatically depending on which part of the country you live in), number of children, possible medical issues, caring for elderly parents (contributing to them financially) ... and have not factored in that the 145K salary was not consistent for the 30 years, and 30 years ago was probably closer to 30K, perhaps averaging 75-100K over the years, not counting taxes, which would chew up a significant part of that.  You have a real problem here making snap judgments while knowing almost nothing about OP's situation.

For all you know, OP could live in California, where decent homes cost a million dollars, have 12 children, 6 of whom are in college, and need automobiles, having to pay large medical bills that weren't covered by college, and paying for the care of parents who may need medical or nursing care.  In other words, you know zilch and are making snap judgments.
You are projecting.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 10:49:00 AM
You are projecting.
Said the kettle to the pot.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 10:49:52 AM
I may be in a similar situation soon.  Millions will be.  All over the country.  Big companies know the economy is going to shrink and they will cut jobs to save their bottom-line. 

God has a plan.
Thank you for keeping an eye on the bigger picture.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 11:35:29 AM
Well you're not as special as the OP who is obviously not only legendarily talented, but also rich from such a high paying job and could retire now on the $4.35 million. The op would however need to budget to live on $145k / year for the next 30 years! If he's still alive after that well who knows? Heck, the OP would never have to worry about making ends meet on meager social security checks every month. I mean, how much money does the OP need anyway? Retire already!
The above quote demonstrates a capacity for elementary maths of 30 years x 145K per year, but not elementary common sense that OP wasn't making 145K each of those years from year 1, nor that OP stashed all that cash and somehow lived for 30 years miraculously without using any of it. Retire already from this argument!
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 11:48:53 AM
Lad is correct here.  We don't know all of the OP's economic statistics or where they live.  145K a year is 45K a year in some places.  Where I'm from it's a lot but it's considered middle tier middle class in some areas.  OP was coming off as a pretentious jerk but to grill on them about the money they make and the way it is being done does come off as envy of what they are making.  
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 11:52:45 AM
If you give people advice in areas beyond your experience, then you aren't being helpful.  Bad advice, even if given in charity, is still bad advice.
This. Gold star comment. People who know what it's like to have to work 20 hour days staring at a computer screen in order to meet a deadline, and then be able to log out for a week to recuperate, IYKYK. But the moment the OP said "tech project mgmt" then basic Catholic humility means that anyone who has no knowledge of tech project mgmt should hold off on irrelevant attention-grabbing opinions. Do show concern and offer a prayer, then decently step aside.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 11:58:46 AM
This. Gold star comment. People who know what it's like to have to work 20 hour days staring at a computer screen in order to meet a deadline, and then be able to log out for a week to recuperate, IYKYK. But the moment the OP said "tech project mgmt" then basic Catholic humility means that anyone who has no knowledge of tech project mgmt should hold off on irrelevant attention-grabbing opinions. Do show concern and offer a prayer, then decently step aside.
Please do share the "attention grabbing opinions".  And do be ready to prove that they were "attention grabbing".
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 12:07:20 PM
The above quote demonstrates a capacity for elementary maths of 30 years x 145K per year, but not elementary common sense that OP wasn't making 145K each of those years from year 1, nor that OP stashed all that cash and somehow lived for 30 years miraculously without using any of it. Retire already from this argument!

This!
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 12:09:08 PM
Actually, OP could have retired early with that income and number of years working. It's called reducing your living expenses.

Unless the $145K was only because they lived in a high cost-of-living area, like California. You can't get California or even Big City income while living in rural Kansas or a flyover state with a low cost-of-living. That would be a sweet deal, but it's not possible. Flyover states and rural areas are great to live in, but the incomes are going to be lower to match.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 12:15:10 PM
Please do share the "attention grabbing opinions".  And do be ready to prove that they were "attention grabbing".
:jester::facepalm::fryingpan::pray:
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 12:18:11 PM
:jester::facepalm::fryingpan::pray:
I see you are unable/want to point out the so-called attention-grabbing posts, so you resort to making fun.  Such Catholic humility!    
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 13, 2024, 12:21:54 PM
The above quote demonstrates a capacity for elementary maths of 30 years x 145K per year, but not elementary common sense that OP wasn't making 145K each of those years from year 1, nor that OP stashed all that cash and somehow lived for 30 years miraculously without using any of it. Retire already from this argument!

Precisely.  I know from personal experience that 25 years ago I was making $30K as an entry level developer, and it took many years to work my way up to where I'm at, and, by the way, had 6 children, many expenses, experienced some adversities, etc.  I would imagine that the average salary over the 30 years would be more like $75K-$80K, and then you factor taxes into that, and living expenses, which vary depending on the part of the country you live in, how many children you have, other issues you might face (things breaking).  One tiny example is that I've had to get a new washer-dryer set every 4 years.  With all our kids, the thing is constantly running.  I was able to make basic repairs, of course, but then the main computer board would fry, and the cost of just the part was 80% of a new one.  I've also had lots of issues with cars, things like my furnace, a/c, roof, etc. ... all the while dealing with very large food expenditures, etc.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 12:34:01 PM
I see you are unable/want to point out the so-called attention-grabbing posts, so you resort to making fun.  Such Catholic humility!   
no just not submitting to un Catholic demands. when you say "jump" don't expect everybody to say "how high"
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 12:58:18 PM
It is hoping beyond hope to expect that "trads" will cease being know-nothing know-it-alls.
not "trads" just human, even if trads forget that they are no less human than non-trads.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 01:02:20 PM
This is truly an ignorant (and envious?) remark.
:laugh2:
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 01:09:21 PM
So, it's an uncatholic demand to ask you to provide support for your opinion on what YOU think the motives of other posters are (ie. "attention-grabbing" posts)? Actually, what was "unCatholic" was your judging their internal forum.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 01:33:01 PM
  In the face of the perennial nursing shortage, layoff of massive numbers of nurses strikes me as a depopulationist move to enhance the lethality of the next wave bioweapon "pandemic."

Especially as some nurses are now waking up to the harm done to their selves and families, bodies and souls, from what the last plandemic wanted from them so as to be able to keep their jobs. Then there are all these on-contract "travel nurses" who for long stretches of time have to be apart from their own young children, even newborns. Imagine having to live like that.

The so-called health care industry has bloated into a huge cash cow to the point where they're killing the goose that used to lay the golden eggs, pardon the mixed metaphor. They create endemic illness in order to create a corporate need to exist, especially the revenue stream to support an army of managerials utterly superfluous to a rightly-ordered society.

The players again see that there are multiple tribes of vultures, including government regulators, insurance companies, and so on, who now find themselves all working at cross purposes. Party over, till they invent new mega scams to replace the old ones.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 13, 2024, 01:48:41 PM
Whether knowingly or not, the "government regulators, insurance companies, and so on" are not working at cross purposes, but are united in their (((satanic depopulationist agenda))).

Yes, they are.  I'll provide a simple example.  It's medically proven that chemotherapy has no benefit for any tissue cancers, but some marginal results with leukemia and lymphoma only.  Yet the health insurance companies go along with paying out hundreds of thousands for that nonsense anyway.  You would think the insurance companies would fight it and assert that they shouldn't have to pay for a treatment that is proven not to work.  More people are killed by chemotherapy than by cancer itself.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 01:56:18 PM
So, it's an uncatholic demand to ask you to provide support for your opinion on what YOU think the motives of other posters are (ie. "attention-grabbing" posts)? Actually, what was "unCatholic" was your judging their internal forum.
but you questioning my internal forum is allowed, two standards, got it. this isn't about your motives or your internal forum. the external forum proof of attention-grabbing behavior is  the fact that people have to stop talking about what they're talking about because they have to answer YOUR demands and allegations over and over again instead of being left in peace to discuss the topic. bye.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 02:18:25 PM
In the face of the perennial nursing shortage, layoff of massive numbers of nurses strikes me as a depopulationist move to enhance the lethality of the next wave bioweapon "pandemic."
Don't mean to derail but in Canada, amid this terrible health care shortage, a major hospital hired a liason nurse for the queers so they won't feel uncomfortable in the hospital setting.
 Will she fast track them for treatment?
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 02:40:13 PM
but you questioning my internal forum is allowed, two standards, got it. this isn't about your motives or your internal forum. the external forum proof of attention-grabbing behavior is  the fact that people have to stop talking about what they're talking about because they have to answer YOUR demands and allegations over and over again instead of being left in peace to discuss the topic. bye.
I never questioned your internal forum (but I think you know that).  I asked you to cough up evidence that people posted to grab attention. Because you can't/refuse to do so is not my fault. As far as anyone can tell in the external forum, those posters did not post to grab attention.
 
But nice attempt at making this about me. What you should have done was apologize for going as far as saying posters were just making "irrelevant, attention-grabbing opinions".
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 13, 2024, 05:15:23 PM
Actually, OP could have retired early with that income and number of years working. It's called reducing your living expenses.
You're an idiot.
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 15, 2024, 11:47:57 PM
https://www.tennessean.com/story/opinion/contributors/2024/01/15/tennessee-health-care-doctors-nurses-brain-drain-abortion-trans-laws/72107846007/

Brain drained Doctors and nurses whining that they will leave to make more money to murder babies and mutilate children.  

By not performing anti life abortions and trans, this should free up doctors and nurses to help people with medical problems.  Hospitals are all about profits over people which is Anti Christ.  
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 15, 2024, 11:54:58 PM
“Brain drain” United nation of nitwits terminology.  

Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Matthew on January 16, 2024, 01:50:03 PM
I am re-porting this in hopes that the OP can openly name the major healthcare provider.

Some people have an exaggerated sense of how exposed their identity is.

Officer on phone: "Are you male or female?"
Paranoid on other end of conversation: "I don't want to say."
Officer: "Come on, it's just your sex. What can I possibly do with that?"
Paranoid: "I don't know, but I'm afraid to give out anything that might identify me."
Officer: "How could your sex, male or female, identify you?"
Paranoid: "Ok, I guess you're right. I'm male."
Officer: "Oooooh, I got you now! You're John Harrington, aren't you! John Harrington of Toledo, OH. You live on 428 E. 19th St. I'm coming for you right now, you son of a bitch!"
Paranoid: "shit!" *hangs up phone and runs away*

See how ridiculous that scenario is?
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Ladislaus on January 16, 2024, 01:53:04 PM
I am re-porting this in hopes that the OP can openly name the major healthcare provider.

Yes, this would be good to know, and there's no reason not to share it.  OP is being laid off by the company anyway, and it's certainly public information, as layoffs of that magnitude have to be reported to most states (so they can prepare for the potential impact to unemployment payouts).
Title: Re: 35% Workforce Reduction at Major Healthcare Provider
Post by: Änσnymσus on January 16, 2024, 04:20:35 PM
OP here: I was waiting to see if press releases were made.  A few news stories and the number is not being reported--just said to be "small".  NOBODY in the company is talking about it.  I have worked here for almost 9 years and not one person has reached out to me.  No chatter on the company Yammer. Clearly people are scared to talk. There is an active subreddit though. We were told up to 35% cuts and furthermore they will continue throughout this year until financial targets are met so that a merger with Cigna can happen.  The company is Humana.  Expect impacts to any government related healthcare, including Tricare, Medicare, and Medicaid.