[pavel_lishin]

Get the bucket ready, I have another anecdote.

Someone I know worked for a company that instituted wildly unpopular policies across their entire workplace, just to try and get three people to quit. They suffered massive attrition at every level of the org, this went on for something like 9 months, and in the end only one of their "targets" left voluntarily.

I cannot fathom how this was less expensive than just laying off those three with severance packages.

[p_l]

The excel model sees reduction in operating costs and not the long-tail of reduced productivity

[gatinsama]

I will steal this

[antisthenes]

The problem with these policies is that the people LEAST likely to quiet are also the most likely to comply with the shit policies, because they have no other option (or it's going to be the most difficult for them to find a different/better job)

Not sure if they teach second-order effects in those MBA-mills though.

[switch007]

That's shocking, but not surprising. I can just imagine the mental gymnastics the HR staff did to feel OK with helping with that plan.

[pavel_lishin]

I have no idea how involved they were; I didn't get the nitty-gritty details of the story, just heard the broad strokes over beers.

I can easily imagine that HR was never told about the purpose of the changes. I can also imagine that HR has bills to pay, and a lack of desire to quit without another job lined up.