[des429]

I was told at some point by someone that a layoff can’t be done based on performance, because that would mean it’s a firing instead. An amazon manager told me they were careful to avoid mentioning perf as a factor in their latest layoffs. Is that accurate and if so how does this jive with that at all?

[thinkharderdev]

I don't know how it works exactly but there is a meaningful difference between being fired "for cause" vs just being fired in many jurisdictions. For instance, if you're fired for cause then you may not be eligible to collect unemployment insurance. But as I understand it (and IANAL) this would apply only to things like gross misconduct (eg stealing from the company, assaulting colleagues, showing up to work drunk, etc) and poor performance wouldn't really count as being fired for cause.

In the US though employment is "at will" meaning you can be fired for any reason or no reason at all. There are various exceptions to this but the burden of proof is generally on the employee to show that they were wrongfully terminated (eg if they were fired because of their race, sex, sexual orientation, etc).

[_nalply]

> [...] but the burden of proof is generally on the employee to show that they were wrongfully terminated [...]

This is same for Switzerland and probably Europe. In Switzerland you have three month's notice for resigning and for being laid off. You can be fired for cause without notice, but this applies only if the cause is severe enough that a continuation of the employment shouldn't be asked of the company or the employee any more. This has consequences for unemployment insurance. Usually the ex-employee needs to wait 4 weeks for unemployment benefits. It's the same if the employee resigned.

[simonh]

The article says this new performance tool is to be used to fire people, as against lay them off.