NetJets Layoff

NetJets laid off an undisclosed number of employees yesterday in at
least the Ohio offices.

The employees (some as long as seven years) arrived at work yesterday
and were called into meetings where they were told their positions no
longer existed, their benefits end on Friday (June 30th), given a
document outlining the terms of their 'voluntary resignation', and
given an hour to remove their personal property. Two I spoke to said
they were not even assisted removing their belongings, or provided with
boxes/carts or anything. Their access badges were taken, so it was a
one trip deal.

I've seen people fired for 'just cause' get better treatment than these
'voluntary resignees' received.

Perhaps with Warren Buffet's recent donation to the Gate's Foundation,
he has lost concern for his human resources. But then again, they are
voluntarily resigning, so it's not really a layoff, right?

wrote in message
oups.com...
NetJets laid off an undisclosed number of employees yesterday in at
least the Ohio offices.

The employees (some as long as seven years) arrived at work yesterday
and were called into meetings where they were told their positions no
longer existed, their benefits end on Friday (June 30th), given a
document outlining the terms of their 'voluntary resignation', and
given an hour to remove their personal property. Two I spoke to said
they were not even assisted removing their belongings, or provided with
boxes/carts or anything. Their access badges were taken, so it was a
one trip deal.

I've seen people fired for 'just cause' get better treatment than these
'voluntary resignees' received.

Perhaps with Warren Buffet's recent donation to the Gate's Foundation,
he has lost concern for his human resources. But then again, they are
voluntarily resigning, so it's not really a layoff, right?


Hell I thought they were hiring.

----------------------------------------------
DW

wrote in message
oups.com...
NetJets laid off an undisclosed number of employees yesterday in at
least the Ohio offices.

The employees (some as long as seven years) arrived at work yesterday
and were called into meetings where they were told their positions no
longer existed, their benefits end on Friday (June 30th), given a
document outlining the terms of their 'voluntary resignation', and
given an hour to remove their personal property. Two I spoke to said
they were not even assisted removing their belongings, or provided with
boxes/carts or anything. Their access badges were taken, so it was a
one trip deal.

I've seen people fired for 'just cause' get better treatment than these
'voluntary resignees' received.

Perhaps with Warren Buffet's recent donation to the Gate's Foundation,
he has lost concern for his human resources. But then again, they are
voluntarily resigning, so it's not really a layoff, right?

My employer is 100% owned by Berkshire and I can tell you that Buffet and/or
Berkshire is extremely hands-off on daily operational matters and policies.
Fundamentally, Berkshire expects its divisions to obey all legal
requirements, provide certain report to corporate HQ, and generate at least
a certain return on assets. That is slightly oversimplified, but the bottom
line is that senior management of the various business units have
near-autonomy in handling daily operations and making strategic decisions
for their businesses. It is doubtful that Berkshire has any knowledge of
how the release of these employees was handled.

KB

A friend was given notice at 4:00 PM Tuesday afternoon. No explaination
was given for the layoff, only that it was not performance related. This
was a top management level employee.
The local news organizations have not yet picked up the story.

"john smith" wrote in message
...
A friend was given notice at 4:00 PM Tuesday afternoon. No explaination
was given for the layoff, only that it was not performance related. This
was a top management level employee.
The local news organizations have not yet picked up the story.

That's cause there is NO story.

It's called life.

The local news organizations have not yet picked up the story.

That's cause there is NO story.
It's called life.

It is a story when a company owned by Warren Buffett is supposedly doing
well profit-wise suddenly, without explaination lays off scores of
employees. It raises questions about managements honesty and integrety.
The stockholders would certainly have an interest in knowing.

"john smith" wrote in message
...
The local news organizations have not yet picked up the story.

That's cause there is NO story.
It's called life.

It is a story when a company owned by Warren Buffett is supposedly doing
well profit-wise suddenly, without explaination lays off scores of
employees. It raises questions about managements honesty and integrety.

It raises questions, but the ones you post are flat out paranoid and NOYDB!

The stockholders would certainly have an interest in knowing.

Well, you think maybe the management will let them know without having to
blab to the media?

I read somewhere that NetJets lost $143M in 2005.

john smith wrote:
A friend was given notice at 4:00 PM Tuesday afternoon. No explaination
was given for the layoff, only that it was not performance related. This
was a top management level employee.
The local news organizations have not yet picked up the story.

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
oups.com...
I read somewhere that NetJets lost $143M in 2005.


I always felt that offering fractional ownership of a plane for business
purposes was not a sustainable business model. Corporate private flying is
primarily ego driven (must have plane - makes me look important), not
business driven. For most companies it is an unnecessary expense, so they
will eventually drop it. The next aviation business failure appears to be
the idea that very light jets can be used as business transportation between
small airports. Maybe, maybe not. The next few years will tell.

In article . net,
"Tom Conner" wrote:

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
oups.com...
I read somewhere that NetJets lost $143M in 2005.


I always felt that offering fractional ownership of a plane for business
purposes was not a sustainable business model. Corporate private flying is
primarily ego driven (must have plane - makes me look important), not
business driven. For most companies it is an unnecessary expense, so they
will eventually drop it. The next aviation business failure appears to be
the idea that very light jets can be used as business transportation between
small airports. Maybe, maybe not. The next few years will tell.

In some cases, perhaps. But in most cases, business is done face to
face. Corporate/private aviation is the only way to assure privacy and
timely contact. Airlines and their schedules are too unreliable.
Corporate executives that have the authority to make deals happen are
too valuable, highly compensated and their time is too valuable to have
them sitting around an airline gate where they can be recognized,
waiting for a plane that may or may not arrive and depart on time.
I worked for NetJets 12 years ago as a dispatcher. I saw where jets went
and who was onboard. I knew who was going, but not who they were
meeting. It was only after a deal was reported in the WSJ that I learned
who the target in a merger/acquisition was.