Layoffs have been in the air for a while, and they’ve even hit pretty close to home for me, so I thought I’d share a story from a different layoff at a different time, to put some things into perspective and (hopefully) offer a modicum of comfort to people whose LinkedIn profiles are currently sporting that fancy green “OpenToWork” banner.
In 2006, I was working at one of the top-rated regional banks in the United States. In 2008, this bank found itself on the wrong side of the housing crisis and, as a result, was bought by a much larger bank for pennies on the dollar.
After the purchase, things were relatively quiet for a month or two. Everyone knew changes were coming, but no one could predict what would actually happen. For example, my bank had an IT department of over 2,500 people. The bank that was acquiring us had an equally gigantic technology organization. So we knew there were redundancies in more than just the typical service groups like accounting and human resources, but we had no idea what projects, skills, and personnel were missing from the buyer. We didn’t know who might be “safe”
The result was that my bank’s IT organization became even more risk-averse than usual (which is saying something, given that this was a bank in the mid-2000s), so, in addition to the uncertainty, there was little chance of getting involved in an interesting or meaningful project to prove itself.
And then came one special Friday morning, when 15-minute meetings appeared on everyone’s calendar. When I say “everyone,” I mean all 2,500 people in IT. Starting at 8:30 a.m. m., people began filtering into one of the dozens of meeting rooms scattered around the facility, staffed by an apparent army of human resources people who had been hired for this purpose.
In those first hours, those of us who were waiting for the appointed time worried about losing our jobs.
By 10:00 am the reality had become shockingly clear: we were ALL losing our jobs. As the morning progressed, we realized that the question was not “would we keep our jobs?” sino si nos despedirían ese día, o dentro de 30 días, o en 90 días. And also if we would receive compensation for 3, 6 or 12 months.
The following Monday, Human Resources released a report showing that of the original 2,500 IT employees, fewer than 1,000 would be retained. Despite the delayed end date and generous compensation, more than 1,500 people began to process the inevitable impact that comes with losing their jobs.
BUT… and this is perhaps the critical point of the story… over the next few weeks it became clear who had really dodged a bullet. Surprisingly, they were the ones who left.
This was largely due to the “shit rolling downhill” effect. With each wave of departures, the workload fell on those left behind. Initially, this waterfall was another kick in the teeth for those who had been laid off. People who were 1 and 3 months away found themselves taking on the additional workload of those who had been laid off the previous Friday.
In that first wave, and even after the departure of the 1-month-olds, the impact was bearable. In most organizations, a surprising number of tasks can be postponed for a month or two without any noticeable effect. But, as the 3 month mark approached, the workload began to pile up on the fraction of people who would be left behind, and cracks began to appear, and it was more than just the workload that contributed.
Everyone who had been laid off not only received pay and insurance for the duration of our severance, but they also received resume services, job training, mental health resources, and more. Not only that, but while we worked our final weeks, we could come to the office and use all the office equipment to manage our job search. (Again, it was the early 2000s. Working from home wasn’t exactly what it is today.)
Meanwhile, down to the last person, the remaining team