[contrarian1234]

Is this the normal course of things?

"We are now beginning the process of consultation on initial reductions."

I'm not in the know.. but it comes off as if they have no idea what they're doing. You'd think you'd decide who you are gunna lay off before announcing it..? And they will be laying people off for two years straight? Seems like it'd just tank the moral of the whole place.

I thought companies generally rip the bandaid off and do it all very quickly - and have a concrete plan before an announcement

[alibarber]

In Finland there is a mandated period of 'consultation' - usually at least 2 weeks long, between company and employees (or their representatives) when such things happen. I don't know if the actual term in Finnish is supposed to sound as euphemistic as the English one - but at this point it's pretty much decided.

[hiAndrewQuinn]

"Muutosneuvottelut", which literally translates to "change negotiations", is basically the Finnish way of saying "mass layoffs and corporate restructuring incoming". Not the same thing as what you're describing but I find it funny in the same way.

[thisisit]

> In Finland there is a mandated period of 'consultation'

Those consultations have been going on sometime now. This is nearly over. Overall, this is just plain stupid wording.

[m00dy]

Is Nokia still a Finnish company ?

[dagw]

Nokia has always been a Finnish company. They've just licensed their name out (via a daughter company) for use on phones now.

[m00dy]

I thought Microsoft bought it long time ago and it became US company then. But, I think it is not the case anymore.

[dagw]

Microsoft didn't buy Nokia the company, despite what a lot of journalists made it sound like at the time. They bought Nokia's mobile phone division and related businesses. With the purchase they also got 10-year exclusive right to use the Nokia name on phones.

[dagw]

You'd think you'd decide who you are gunna lay off before announcing it

They almost certainly have. The consultation process is basically negotiating with the unions over what sort of package they have to offer to the laid off workers to avoid the unions being difficult about the whole thing.

[NoboruWataya]

In the EU you are generally required to inform and consult with staff in advance of large-scale redundancies. https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/human-resources/employ...

[mschuster91]

> I thought companies generally rip the bandaid off and do it all very quickly - and have a concrete plan before an announcement

In the US yes, and companies are free to ruin the lives of thousands of people overnight in most states thanks to at-will employment.

In Europe, where Nokia is based, companies have to actually follow laws. No firing of individuals without cause, mass layoffs outside of bankruptcy have minimum terms (in Germany, you have up to 7 months until your employment actually terminates), and usually employers have to broker deals with unions, worker representatives (Germany: Betriebsrat) and government / unemployment insurance schemes as well. As a result, there's no need to "rip bandaids off" - employees know that even if there's talks of layoffs going on, their lives won't be upended randomly.

[contrarian1234]

"companies have to actually follow laws“

What? Nokia won't follow laws in other countries?

"No firing of individuals without cause"

That's generally the distinction between firing and laying off. Layed off employees generally get unemployment.

"7 months until your employment actually terminates"

You continue working at a company that you will have to leave? What incentives do you have to keep putting in any effort? Doesn't this lead to massive amount of corporate theft? In the US you are typically "shown the door" when your employment is terminated to minimize the possibility of disgruntled ex-employees taking corporate IP with them.

"employees know that even if there's talks of layoffs going on, their lives won't be upended randomly"

That honestly seems just worse for everyone involved. Aren't you in a weird limbo for months/years on end where you don't know if your position will be terminated? It seems horrible for moral. The most talented people would probably not want to put up with the uncertainty and will leave while unions are negotiating

[dagw]

Aren't you in a weird limbo for months/years on end where you don't know if your position will be terminated?

Isn't that every day at a job in an At-Will state in the US?

Also if you quit of your own volition while the unions are negotiating you get nothing. If you wait until the unions are done negotiating and get laid off you get several month of severance pay. In fact quitting while layoffs are being discussed has to be among the dumbest financial decision you can make.

[speed_spread]

> quitting while layoffs are being discussed has to be among the dumbest financial decision

I understand how one would want to stick around not to miss out on a juicy package but this seems counter productive for the employer, the employees and society in general. I can assume that the productivity impact is non negligible, with many workers sitting on their ass waiting to be laid off. Conversely, some workers might have immediate opportunities elsewhere which they can't take for fear of losing out on the bonanza. Finally, If everybody hits the job market at once when it's done there's more chance that the package money is going to get spent just looking for another job.

There really should be a fair retroactive + proportional compensation mechanism for people leaving on their own during the "negotiation" period.

[contrarian1234]

This is generally speaking not a problem. It's technically possible, but generally in at-will states in the US, for exactly that reason, there is a strong incentive to not "randomly" lay people off b/c the company gets a reputation for being unpredictable and people don't feel secure in their jobs. They start to view their jobs are more transitory and it erodes company loyalty

Most companies will intentionally avoid doing layoffs and only do them in these large batches when there are financial necessary (like the tech sector layoffs we saw recently). Only "shitty" companies lay off people randomly to balance/adjust the books

[evandijk70]

"What incentives do you have to keep putting in any effort? Doesn't this lead to massive amount of corporate theft? In the US you are typically "shown the door" when your employment is terminated to minimize the possibility of disgruntled ex-employees taking corporate IP with them."

The incentives to keep doing a good job are your intrinsic motivation to do a decent job, your professional reputation and receiving good references for your upcoming job applications. Doesn't the american approach of showing employees the door right after being fired to a poor transfer of their responsibilities?

[contrarian1234]

"to a poor transfer of their responsibilities?"

Yes and no. People are also free to leave at any moment - so the concern is inevitable an you generally structure your responsibilities to minimize the "bus factor"

[mschuster91]

> You continue working at a company that you will have to leave? What incentives do you have to keep putting in any effort? Doesn't this lead to massive amount of corporate theft? In the US you are typically "shown the door" when your employment is terminated to minimize the possibility of disgruntled ex-employees taking corporate IP with them.

If employers fear that, they can do something that's called "Freistellung" in Germany - basically, employees don't have to work any more but still get paid just the same until the employment contract expires.

[doikor]

Yes "garden leave" is one option.

But also you did sign the NDA which still applies even after you no longer work for the company. Though most people working in tech work on such mundane things that their workplace really doesn't have anything worth stealing IP wise.

[mschuster91]

If you as an employer are afraid that people will take sensitive IP with them, continue employing them on paper and paying them for the inconvenience of not being able to go to a different employer.

[doikor]

> What incentives do you have to keep putting in any effort?

Your paycheck?

You can still be fired on the spot if you are not doing your job. Though it might require a warning depending on the jurisdiction.

> Aren't you in a weird limbo for months/years on end where you don't know if your position will be terminated?

At least in Finland the legal requirement for the negotiations is 2 weeks and usually they take exactly that long. It can be even shorter if both sides agree.

The 2 week period also works well in a lot of low paying fields where you are paid every 2 weeks. Basically meaning that everyone knows they are getting their next paycheck in full (outside of a proper bankruptcy which is pretty much the only way out of these rules)

[contrarian1234]

"and usually they take exactly that long"

Then I guess it's unrelated to the two year long firing that's been announced

[doikor]

Yeah term of notice is a different thing which you can work around of with severance packages.

Terms of notice in Finland change a bit based on position/field but in general (might be off by a year here an there but in general 6 months is the longest after 10 or 12 years depending on the position/field)

After probationary period 2 weeks, after 1 years 1 month, after 4 years 2 months, after 8 years 4 months and after 12 years 6 months. (these also apply in the other direction when you are quitting but with different numbers)

Also something telling about the speed of these negotiations this the 3rd round this year for Nokia in Finland.

Also this is just for Finland. Pretty much every country in the EU has their own rules when it comes to large scale layoffs. EU pretty much just says "you have to try and negotiate with the workers/unions" but that is all.

[thisisit]

> but it comes off as if they have no idea what they're doing

Yep. The whole company has been like that. Just look at the rebranding comment someone in this thread.

[moffkalast]

I think that's the part where they bring in consultants to ask each person "What exactly would you say you do here?"

[ogjojo]

Don’t quote me on this but it might have something to do with Finnish law. Don’t know how that applies internationally if at all.

[user_named]

What an ignorant, obnoxious comment