Are you "redundant" or are they "letting you go"?
Credit: AI

Are you "redundant" or are they "letting you go"?

Words matter: How to talk - and not to talk - about layoffs

We are living in a time of layoffs in tech. During a time where many sectors were desperately trying to hire, the tech industry was caught by surprise that in a post-pandemic world, people started reclaiming their lives in the real world and reduced their online activities. Oh yeah, and AI also “caught everyone by surprise”...

As companies started to blast out layoff announcements, I have been observing with disbelief the terms used in these communications. As times continued, I have been seeing impacted employees to pick up the same terminology which was even weirder to me. To put things in context: I am not a native English speaker. Many of these terms were not known to me in that context, so what might sound very familiar and non-problematic to a US or native English speaking person, sounds very different to me.

Unnecessary harshness

One of my least favorite terms is “Redundancy”. “Making a role redundant” is a term used to describe a company removing a role. It is very often used in an abbreviated form: “Making someone redundant” or “I have been made redundant”. Redundancy - the word used to describe that the position itself has been eliminated due to changes in the company's business or operations. Redundant! Synonyms are obsolete, superfluous, unnecessary, unwanted, dispensable, irrelevant.

I remember reading that term for the first time and thinking: “Who wants to feel redundant?”. Why do I perceive this term as awful? It's an impersonal term that downplays the human impact of job loss. Instead of acknowledging the personal and professional disruption that layoffs cause, the term "making redundant" frames the situation as a mere business decision, devoid of human consequence. It suggests that the employee is somehow at fault or has failed in their role. It reinforces a culture of disposability in the workplace, employees are easily replaceable and expendable.?

Another term I have seen used is “being terminated”. Of course it means that their work contract is being terminated, not the person themselves. The word "terminate" is often used in medical contexts to refer to the end of a life. It feels very harsh and impersonal when used to describe the ending of a work relationship and it doesn't accurately reflect the reality of what is happening. Employees are not actually being "terminated" in the sense of being destroyed or abolished.

Unnecessary softness

On the other end of the spectrum there are words that try to sugarcoat what is happening, by using terms that try to obfuscate the fact that people are losing their jobs.?

One example is the word “offboarding”. The term "offboarding" suggests a process of moving someone off a project or team, rather than them being laid off. It is often used in a business context to refer to the phase where an employee ramps off an effort, before moving them to a new effort, with the company helping an employee transition. But that is not what's happening during a layoff at all. If someone is being laid off, they aren’t offboarded, they are being laid off.

A similar term I have encountered is that a company is “letting go” their employees. There are multiple problems with using the terminology "letting go employees" in the context of a layoff. A layoff is not the result of employees being "let go" by their employers. Instead, it is the result of a business decision that is made by the company's executives. Letting someone go suggests that the employees have some control over the situation, which is not the case. Layoffs are involuntary, and employees have no say in whether or not they are laid off. The term "letting go" is not an appropriate or effective way to describe layoffs. It is inaccurate, insensitive, and misleading.

Just say it as it is

Why are we even using terms that are unnecessary hard or soft when we can simply use the common word “layoff”? A layoff refers to the temporary or permanent suspension of an employee or group of employees by an employer due to reasons usually outside of the employees' control. That’s it: “We decided to lay off 1000 employees”, or “Unfortunately I have been laid off”.

Words matter, choose them wisely.

Samantha D. Gottlieb, PhD, MHS

EPIC Board Member | Technology Researcher | ex-Google

9 个月

Thanks for writing this, Javier. I have also been thinking (since Jan 2023) about the corporate language of laying people off. I collected a number of odd phrases I would hear, and I kept advocating for everyone in my org to call it what it was. Euphemisms deflect and avoid the human impact, which is why I think they're common in the corporate space. There are also words like 'resources' to refer to head count (itself a euphemism!), but which further objectifies the people whose work and lives contribute to the organization. Perhaps we need to start a hashtag, #LaborisPeople ??

回复

Thank you for writing this, Javier! Words do matter and people often confuse the role/position/job with themselves in these situations. So any language that makes that distinction clearer is helpful. This is especially so in the American context where people identify who they are with what they do.

回复
Allison Raaum

x-Google, Program Manager in tech, media, nonprofit | User Experience | Communications | Change Management

9 个月

I 100% agree Javier. Words matter. I have also been troubled with a lot of this new language being promulgated by companies and often embraced, either consciously or sometimes less consciously by employees. One that particularly bothers me is rather than saying someone is simply "laid off" we say "they've been impacted." Let's call it like it is - a layoff. One can reasonably argue that everyone on a team where there is a layoff, is impacted. Let's not detract from the true and difficult experience of the individual who has been laid off by referring to the act as "impacted." It feels like an attempt from companies to soften language (as you suggested above), and possibly even deflect attention from the actor themselves - in this case the company.

Leigh Malone

Analytics, Research & Data Science Leader Ex Google - Meta - Intel - Verizon - TiVo

9 个月

“It reinforces a culture of disposability in the workplace, employees are easily replaceable and expendable”…sadly I think this culture shift (or reversal?) is intentional in some cases.

回复
Dalila Szostak

Head Of User Experience, Trust & Safety at Google | Professor of UX Research | Author | Inventor

9 个月

En COVID se usaba “furlough” lo cual tenía sentido para algunas áreas (servicios, hoteleria) pero también lo escuché en tech… cualquiera! Igual creo que para los empleados que fueron impactados, está bueno tener un vocabulario más amplio que “layoffs” ya que aveces comunicar que “mi role es obsoleto” lo hace menos personal. Es como la diferencia entre “me echaron a mi” vs “echaron a todo el departamento o equipo”. Me imagino que es igual para los ejecutivos, tener más formas de llamar al evento puede desplazar culpabilidad…

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了