PSE Announces Numerous Layoffs in Management Positions

[Weave]

50 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Well, I think "what we've been hearing" has been 90% speculation.  I also think that since LQ mentioned health insurance specifically but not severance, it's possible-to-likely that this was a deliberate choice of words -- i.e. that he wanted to paint TP in a bad light, so he omitted mentioning severance.

Bottom line IMHO is that in the absence of facts I prefer not to assume that people are acting in an avaricious manner.

I never indicated avarice.  In fact, I specifically mentioned budget, which could be as neutral in intent as you want to see it.  See, you do assume.  ?

 

[Broken Ankles]

3 hours ago, Weave said:

Where are these "normal" severance packages coming from?  It's been awhile since any company in my field offered that kind of severance, and if it were a performance related decision as assumed here, severance wasn't in play anywhere I've been employed.

Given what we've been hearing, I don't know how you assume PSE was on the generous side of industry standard right now.  If they are in controlling costs mode, I would imagine soft skills costs would be among the first to get cut.

 In the tech industry the standards I've seen are as follows:  Manager/Sr. Manager - 2 weeks + 1 week for each year of service.  Director - 2 weeks + 2 weeks for each year of service, VP - 2 weeks + 4 weeks for each year up to one year.   Anything higher than this - Ex VP,  President of a region, CIO, COO, CFO or CEO are all based on individual contracts that lock you in for 'x' years.  If you part ways at any time you are paid through the term agreed upon.  I once reported to one of the worst EX VP's ever that was brought in from HP for a three year contract.  He was terminated after 2.  Everyone below him hated him,  and we suspected above as well.  A friend in payroll confirmed he was receiving his $350K annual salary every two weeks through year 3.  I'm not sure what his stock options or bonus impact was, but I equate these contract to that of a GM or Coach.  If you part ways, there is still an obligation to pay the remainder left on the deal.   Unless you are terminated for cause - and by this I mean egregious behavior and provable beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law, I suspect the three Executives terminated for the Sabres will receive their severance.  I'm confident that if and when the time comes when my performance is not commensurate with my salary the company moves on from me,  I'll enjoy the "Summer of George +" for my 24 years .  ?

   Here is the question that I find fascinating.  Why is it we (outside @Ogre who maintains a personal relationship with some) feel bad for these Executives?  The large preponderance of us want JB fired for the poor performance of the team on the Ice.  Most of the STH's that post here seem unimpressed with the Day to Day Operations of the Sabres.  Outside the fact I think it's a top down problem, and you should not expect much improvement in these areas, should we not be happy that they are recognizing internally there are shortcomings?   The only difference I see between any of these three Execs and JB is that the immediate termination starts the clock on getting them off the payroll where as a JB termination will still require him to be paid through the end of his contract (which I'm still not sure if it was 4 or 5 years).  So it makes no difference if it's tomorrow, June 1st or December 31st.   (The underline is most likely wishful thinking).