Unfun Choices
May. 15th, 2009 10:01 pmI work for a privately held company whose owners are looking to divest themselves of the investment in about 3-5 years. To that end, they've asked my location to 'save' a large amount of money in this time frame. The savings equate to removing cost from the overhead expenses. The most basic way to do this is to let people go. This is not unusual in the current business climate. The unfun choice I have is to gleefully work on projects that will facilitate the firing of people. I asked my former boss about the morality of this, and he said that I should do my best on the projects. The employees will be let go whether I better the projects or not, and my successful input may make a quality of work difference for those who remain behind. I see the wisdom in this thought. There is also the words that our head cheese said during a recent staff meeting... the train is leaving the station. You can either climb on or you can be left behind. Fun fun...


no subject
Date: 2009-05-16 12:24 pm (UTC)For a possibly balancing perspective, here's the more common version of this when company leadership has less character. Cost reductions are implemented without any honest looking at consequences. Middle managers are handed conflicting assignements under intense pressure. The work experience becomes toxic. Employee physical and mental health degrades. Company performance radically degrades even quicker. The best employees leave, excepting those who's identity is too closely linked to loyalty. Remaining employees become a cauldron of resentment and territoriality.
When it works, the company restabilizes at some lower level, generally with fewer and unhappy clients, eventually hiring happens again and very very slowly the company rebuilds -- but the scars and negative patterns of the inept downsizing are built in, even after the entire staff turns over.
I still think it sounds like you work for good people.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-16 12:25 pm (UTC)