Severance Package That Requires IT Workers To Be On Call For 2 Years

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Unless the severance package was two years salary, I don't see this happening.

SunTrust Banks in Atlanta is laying off about 100 IT employees as it moves work offshore. But this layoff is unusual for what the employer is asking of its soon-to-be displaced workers: SunTrust's severance agreement requires terminated employees to remain available for two years to provide help if needed, including in-person assistance, and to do so without compensation.
 
Well if this isn't shot down, I can see the future:
If agreeing to this at best mediocre severance agreement, you agree to be available to answer any question we can come up with for the remainder of your life. And within 2 hours. You must provide current email and phone numbers where you can reached within 1 day of any changes.

Basically, it'll be like going on the sex offender list. And if you don't agree to it, you don't get shit and escorted out the door by security. And then they'll probably still call you anyway.
 
After 1 day of my help after being let go you probably won't want me to stick around anymore. If you're not paying don't be too surprised if the help provided only makes things worse. :p
 
Sorry, I couldn't come to the phone. I'm sorry you are having issues.

Seriously, what are they trying to do? If you don't answer a call and tell them exactly what they need to know in 2 years then they can revoke your severance? If they called me I would just hang-up and act like I never received the call. Or say "My rate is $5000/hr for any and assistance. Please let me know where to send the invoice to"
 
bman212121 said:
After 1 day of my help after being let go you probably won't want me to stick around anymore. If you're not paying don't be too surprised if the help provided only makes things worse. :p
Click to expand...

This.

You call me for help after outsourcing me, you better be prepared to pay me at least triple of what you were paying me when I worked there.

If not, my help will not be help at all.
 
What a horrible idea. Just think of the liability concerns alone. What if a laid off employee comes back to help resolve an issue and steals card holder data. Or shit, even just gets hurt in the office. That workers comp claim will be a mess. No way this goes through.
 
The only way I could possibly defend this if Suntrust is paying these guys already in part of their severance. Without compensation may mean additional compensation into what they're getting.

But if these workers aren't getting any additional money from Suntrust after they are terminated then I would tell Suntrust to shove it up their ass.
 
Fire old workers, import HB1 slaves at 1/5th cost, make old workers slaves for 2 year or dont give them severence.

Brilliant plan.
 
I would kindly be telling them *Go fuck yourself*.

No way would I supply a service without some form of compensation.
 
if the severance was a lump sum i would say sure but if they ever called me after that i would become special needs
 
I can see it now...2 years from now....

Company: "Hello, John, we're having issues with server firewalls 3, 5, and 6."
John: "Who is this?"
Company: "Its A.S.S."
John: "Hmm......let me google that for you....." http://lmgtfy.com/?q=go+to+hell
 
Thats like totally not enforcable in court I don't think. IDK though, it's just an all around stupid way to kinda screw your employees one last time for a few more years. Lame and why we totally need to get a central economic system thing.
 
My Answer "I'm sorry I forgot what the system did, it was VERY chaotic there at the end. House on Fire GTG!"
 
Where are we meeting with torches in hand to put an end to this?
 
This is actually a 2-year retainer, not a severance package. If you do not provide good faith service, the bank will take you to court to recover their retainer.
I would just look at the manager making this offer and say bye, no 2-week notice, just walk out the door. But I make sure I have savings so that I have the option to tell employers, fu, if they make unreasonable demands.
 
SunTrust statement:

It is a rare occasion when we need to call a former employee. The “continuing cooperation” clause is designed to assist the company under scenarios that arise infrequently when we need access to knowledge possessed by a former employee. Those scenarios primarily relate to regulatory or legal matters. For instance, we may need to reach out to former employees to ensure we accurately understand situations in which they were involved while employed by the company. SunTrust has never used this provision to require a former employee to be “on call” to help conduct day-to-day business in any way.
Click to expand...

Sorry are we talking about IT guys or hedge fund managers here????

Or are we looking for fall guys for Sarbanes-Oxley issues?

There is no mention of what the "severance" was, so I think there is something being left out here. For all we know they could have offered them a large lump sum in exchange, but to say that would negate the dramatic one sided deal we are be told.
 
westrock2000 said:
Sorry are we talking about IT guys or hedge fund managers here????

Or are we looking for fall guys for Sarbanes-Oxley issues?

There is no mention of what the "severance" was, so I think there is something being left out here. For all we know they could have offered them a large lump sum in exchange, but to say that would negate the dramatic one sided deal we are be told.
Click to expand...

Fuck that. If it's a legal or regulatory issue of that import, have the regulator issue a summons or subpoena. Otherwise...fuck off with your retainer for 2 years.
 
Haven't heard what the severance package was. But unless it was VERY good, my response to a phone call asking for support might be along the lines of "I am sorry, my current employer made me sign a 'No outside work without approval' agreement. You will need to contact Legal @ xxx-xxxx." Click.
 
Dead Parrot said:
Haven't heard what the severance package was. But unless it was VERY good, my response to a phone call asking for support might be along the lines of "I am sorry, my current employer made me sign a 'No outside work without approval' agreement. You will need to contact Legal @ xxx-xxxx." Click.
Click to expand...

The bank would then take you to court to recover their money since you have violated the terms of the agreement.
 
Wow that is brutal and it's bad that this is even legal. Not only are they killing all these jobs with outsourcing but then putting this requirement on the workers.

Reminds me of what Royal Bank did a few years back, they laid off a bunch of workers to replace them with cheaper "temporary" foreign workers and the old workers had to train the new ones.

This is what's wrong with the way things work today, corporations have us by the balls, not only as consumers but as workers too, and the government backs it. Reminds me of how some companies will not allow you to go work for a company of similar market after you no longer work for them, it's BS that this is even legal. Corporations should not be able to rule it's workers when they're off the clock.
 
SunTrust bank executives will be regretting their decision once the overseas I.T. staff starts absconding personal information of their clients for whatever reason.
 
Now! Now! You don't think corporations hadn't taken measures to make sure this would be 'legit', i.e. have lawmakers agree to a bill that would basically grant those corporations authority to do such things.

This is not new... and this is about to become a norm

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/u...t-disney-train-foreign-replacements.html?_r=0

Don't worry... you can rest assured someone, somewhere will be making quite a chunk of change with this. But not the people who have to go through this.
 
rhexis said:
if the severance was a lump sum i would say sure but if they ever called me after that i would become special needs
Click to expand...

As I am in IT all I can do is agree with the above comment. Oh, they'll be able to get a hold of me alright but there are other ways to play the game as to not break the agreement. Stupidest thing I've ever heard.
 
[RIP]Zeus;1041922149 said:
I would kindly be telling them *Go fuck yourself*.

No way would I supply a service without some form of compensation.
Click to expand...

Kindly? I would straight up say "Go fuck yourself". How disrespectful and shameless.
 
Just when you think you've seen it all.

So you fire them but they have to stay and work for free after...... lmao on what planet!

Hope there is more to this story.
 
This might actually be awesome IF:
Once you got the severance package you got another job with the same company at some other position. That way you'd still be working for them and if they want help with something specific they can always call you during business hours. :p
 
Not saying it to defend it, but it's probably related to Georgia being a right to work state, or fire at will.

People are probably being told they can accept this severance "payout" if they comply.

I hope the negative pr of this move punches Suntrust in the dick. What a fucked up legal move.
 
Sadly the severance package is a payment for layoff so likely is legal even with the up to 2 years provide help if they ask you for it for free since the severance package paid for it. I would still tell them to shove it and file for unemployment and survive on that for time being rather then live under their beck and call for 2 years to train a fool that is replacing me.
 
trentchau said:
Not saying it to defend it, but it's probably related to Georgia being a right to work state, or fire at will.

People are probably being told they can accept this severance "payout" if they comply.

I hope the negative pr of this move punches Suntrust in the dick. What a fucked up legal move.
Click to expand...

And that's the problem, if they don't accept the shitty terms they likely don't get any severance.

Company I used to work for had a big layoff and paid severance depending on how long you'd been there, and they certainly didn't have to. It was all for PR reasons. Which I would imagine is the case in the VAST majority of scenarios. I.e., all of them where you don't have a valid contract that specifies it, which is mostly just for the golden parachute types.
 
Read the article people, the author clearly cites lawyers saying the wording is too broad and would be difficult to enforce because it would violate the Fail Labor Standards Act.

Even if it was an "In acceptance of this agreement, Dickbags, Inc. will provide the employee with a lump sum equal to his/her previous year's salary. In return, said employee will provide assistance to Dickbags, Inc. for a period of two years." type of situation, after a few weeks, it would be pretty simple to say, "I'm sorry, I can't recall." or "I believe it was X, Y, and/or Z." You're not required to remember everything you did, its humanly impossible so it's not like they can hold you to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top