CFO Blog: Commentary and Opinion

You are here: Home : CFO Blog : E-mail Now Delivers Pink Slips

HUMAN CAPITAL

E-mail Now Delivers Pink Slips

Posted by Helen Shaw | CFO.com | US

August 30, 2006 7:33 PM ET

RadioShack terminated about 400 of its employees via an E-mail message on Tuesday.

Yes, it is an electronics retailer and modern equipment is its specialty, but the delivery method of the layoffs seems too impersonal, even in the age of electronic communication.

However, E-mail is quick and clean. It prevents face-to-face meetings that could involve dribbling messes brought on by emotions and eye contact. Maybe it's hard to corral that many redundant employees in conference rooms. Besides, senders of such messages could boast of an efficient, productive morning.

Although news reports state the employees were warned ahead of time that the layoff notifications would be sent by E-mail, I feel sorry for the employees. I'm curious to hear what readers think of firing by E-mail. Post a response or click on my byline to E-mail me.

Comments (9)

Comments | Post a Comment

I think it is the height of disconnected-ness with a splash of cowardice.

HR stands for Human Resources—I think orginally it meant that employees were considered a resource.

Posted by Joan Lockwood | August 30, 2006 06:13pm

In an age of technology, I am not surprised. I am however, disappointed. This behavior breeds the lack of company loyalty. One of the biggest frustrations I hear from hiring managers/HR is that so and so black balled me for another offer.....with employeers handling the tough communications through email we can expect more and more retention issues as a result. After all....the message is "they don't care why should I".

Posted by Alexsys Coleman | August 30, 2006 06:16pm

As a strategic consultant and currently serving as President of an HR consulting firm, I am appalled at the lengths to which an organization will go to accommodate the cowardice of its leadership (or lack thereof). I'll wager that none of them would think it appropriate that an employee would submit a resignation via e-mail to their direct report. Treating employees as an expendable resource is a sign that the company is clearly on the path that leads to ruin in the long term.

Posted by Jack Leach | August 31, 2006 08:57am

Although my first reaction is that such a firing procedure seems harsh, upon reflection, email communication to those affected is very efficient. As long as managers communicate that a layoff is coming and explain options and severance prior to notifying the staff, I do not see anything wrong with this. I have met with many employees who were being fired or laid off, and emotional reactions tend to be more pronounced the greater the shock. The better companies I have worked for prepared the staff for the action such that most layoff meetings consisted of discussion of procedures, questions about benefits and so on. The actual "notification" was a relatively minor part of the meeting. So I think you have to look at the context of the layoff, how it is managed and communicated, and what procedures are available for handling questions and helping those affected. As long as employees are treated respectfully during the whole process, it really does't matter how you actually notify those to be laid off. I have observed plenty of very poorly handled personal meetings to teminate staff - there is no guarantee that a face to face meeting will necessarily be more humane than a properly managed layoff that uses email as a communication tool.

Posted by Frank Sabella | August 31, 2006 10:19am

As is typical, the press has gotten only partial facts and misrepresented the entire process. The employees knew that an email would arrive at 8:45AM, informing them that they would be laid-off. They had 30 minutes to say goodbye, pack-up some of their personal belongings and then they had a face-to-face meeting with their department head. Therefore, management was forced to face the severed employees and didn't hide behind the email. After that meeting, the affected employees had a final 30 minute meeting with other senior leadership and HR to discuss severance, COBRA, etc. The process worked just as it would in many other companies, other than the fact that instead of a supervisor publicly walking into the cube of the affected employee and telling them to "come with me", they were informed in a lot less embarrassing and uncomfortable manner -- management still physically met with and talk to the affected employees and gave them as much respect as could be given in that situation.

Posted by Darin Harper | August 31, 2006 10:35am

I am reading different perspectives on the appropriateness of the situation of Radio Shack's methodology of letting people go. Would this same appraoch have been taken by them if they were delivering good news(promotions and raises)?. If not then I rest my case w.r.t this deplorably conducted scenario.

Posted by Tejal Shah | August 31, 2006 05:04pm

I do not see any difference. It is simply RadioShack's way of being environment-friendly; by going paperless.

Posted by Eugene Calacat | August 31, 2006 09:42pm

Wow - just when you think that corporations are completely disconnected from their employees and nothing should surprise us, guess what? Surprise! Unbelievable. Layoffs are difficult, but companies miss an opportunity to show that it is difficult for both sides. How is a layed off employee supposed to believe that the company will do whatever possible to assist displaced employee find other employment, if they can't even be let go in a more personal manner?

Posted by Sonia Mendoza | September 01, 2006 11:38am

My position was eliminated by a Fortune 500 firm in 1994, and I and the other regional vice presidents found out by an email message with no advance notice. I was on vacation so my secretary knew before I did.

This was a company that was/is known for its strong employee focus. When I asked my boss why via an email, his response was that we were supposed to receive a personal letter, as if that was an acceptable alternative.

Posted by John Burns | September 06, 2006 03:59pm


	MOST RECENT POSTS

		How Smart Is Business Intelligence?

		Confessions of a Facebook Drop-Out

		What Does Internal Audit Expect from the CFO?

		The Real Moneyball

		Expense-Report Approvals: No Laughing Matter


	ABOUT THE CFO BLOG

		FAQ

CFO Blog: Commentary and Opinion

TOPICS

MEDIA

EVENTS

SERVICES

ABOUT CFO

Want the Magazine?