Welcome back to the Bringing the human Back to Human resources
podcast, The Replay series. I'm your host, Tracy Turn off,
and I'm thrilled to have you join us once again as we journey
through the episodes that have top charts around the world.
In this podcast series, we're revisiting some of our most
insightful, thought provoking, and transformative conversations
with industry experts, thought leaders, and practitioners.
These episodes have made waves, sparking meaningful conversation
and inspiring positive change throughout human resources.
Whether you're a dedicated listener who's been with us from
the start or you're just tuning in for the first time, the
Replay series offers a chance to dive deep into the core
principles that guide our exploration into HR practices.
So get ready to rediscover the discussions that continue to
shape the future of HR. Without further ado, let's step
back in time and immerse ourselves into the podcasts top
charted episodes. Let the replay begin.
Hi everyone, welcome back to the Bringing the human back to human
Resources podcast. Thank you so much for being here
for another week. This is probably the most
interesting episode that I have ever done because I know that
most of the guests I think that I've had on before have been
pretty aligned with like HR and what we do.
But this week I actually have Dan Goodman who is the counter
to HR. And he's the counter to HR
because he advocates for employees when they don't have
anyone else to depend on. And often when there are
unfortunately HR professionals who really are not doing the
right thing in businesses or are doing things that they believe
are the right way to go about things and therefore not
supporting employees. So we're going to, it might be a
little divisive. Some people might, you know,
get, I don't know, maybe even a little defensive when they're
listening. But I think that's OK because
this is Dan, you're probably the first voice that we have had on
this podcast who really challenges us to think
differently about HR, about what we do, who we are, and reminds
us that unfortunately, there are practitioners out there who are
who do live up to some of these stigma.
So I'm going to introduce Dan so everyone knows who you are and
what you do. So Dan Goodman has dedicated his
life to standing up for people who need help.
He prides himself on being unafraid to speak the truth and
empowering others to advocate for themselves.
For decades, people have been conditioned to believe that they
are at the mercy of their employer and that their company
holds all of the power in the relationship.
Dan challenges that notion every day.
What started as Dan helping a few people he cared about in
disputes with their employers has turned into Dan Goodman
Employment Advisory DGEA. A veteran of corporate America
himself, Dan has seen company game games and tactics, excuse
me, inside and out in the business world.
He held senior positions in cybersecurity, enterprise
software and executive consulting.
At DGEA. He has successfully helped over
2000 people during critical interactions with their
employer, bringing over 30 plus years of experience to his
passion. DGEA was formed the company
launched February 2023 and has served over 800 plus clients
since its inception. Dan combines his extensive
experience, empathy and business acumen into unique approach that
helps employees navigate the challenges of corporate life.
Prior to DGEA, Dan launched True Commish in 2019, a service that
allows any salesperson to audit their own commissions.
At True Commission, Dan helped top performing salespeople
successfully reclaim hundreds of thousands of dollars from their
employers. To this day, True Commission
remains a free resource for anyone to use for a review of
their commissions or new sales compensation plans.
Dan also has an MBA in Entrepreneurial Studies from
Babson College and ABBA in Finance from the University of
Massachusetts at Amherst. Dan has also been married to his
lovely wife for 32 years and has three children.
He's an avid fan of Boston sports, which we won't get into
since I'm a New York sports fan, but I'm not a Yankee fan, so we
can agree on that it. Was a good night last night
then. Yeah, it was a good, it was a
good night for everyone but the Yankees.
Exactly. He also cherishes summers and
golf on Cape Cod. Lovely.
Love that, and loves a morning walk with his beloved furry
companion, Sawyer. So Dan, welcome and I'm so
excited that we have a counter to HR officially on the podcast.
Well, Tracy, thank you so much for that introduction.
I'm really excited to be here. I just wanted to make one little
edit to the to the introduction. We are now up to almost 1800
clients helping DGA since we started that 2 February's ago.
So really excited. About.
That I got to update the web. Well, you've been busy growing
by more than 1000 clients, so I can understand why it's not 100%
updated. That's amazing.
Well, kudos to you. And I think it for anyone that
is a a reasonable person and especially a a good HR
practitioner, any, I think anyone that is out to help
employees during difficult times or during changes or navigating
changes, I think that's a really wonderful thing because it, you
know, we're going to get into this, but there are a lot of
things that happen to employees over the course of or the span
of an employee life cycle that don't always feel so great.
And those moments, you know, if you have an advocate or if you
have someone that you can rely on, whether inside the
organization or outside, I think that's a great thing.
So with that, maybe we should just dive right in.
Tell us a little bit about where this term or phrase like counter
HR came from and why this advocating for employees is your
mission. Well, the, the, the term
actually came from a client that I was working with before I even
formally started the business. I was basically helping people
for about 6 months at no charge just to sort of navigate and
review severances and things like that.
So they kind of said, you know what, you really are like a
counter to HR and I, I loved it and it stuck.
So I, I kept that on my, on my banner.
I'm just someone who always likes to challenge things.
I was, you know, if, if you ask something, you're told because
it just rubs me the wrong way. It always has since I was a kid.
And I just think that everyone deserves transparency and
honesty and fairness and being playing off the same page.
And I really hate it when people that are taken advantage of
based on misinformation or intentional a lack of
information. So that's kind of why I've, I
was shocked about the landscape and how employers have taken
advantage of employees for so long.
And I wanted to step up and be that advocate and resource for
people to not have to go at it alone.
I agree. I think that's awesome.
And you know, you're right. There are so many and there
unfortunately are still so many examples of people being taken
advantage of in the workforce. And this is where these stigmas
come from, especially with colleagues of mine in the
industry. I mean, I've shared on my
podcast before in the early stages that some of the best
learning lessons that I'd ever received throughout my career
were were from moments where I interacted with HR leaders.
I never wanted to be like. And so we know that those
Sigma's are real. Like the whole reason I started
this podcast was because I've found that there was a major gap
and a major issue between what I believe we're supposed to do for
employees, which is very aligning, I think, with your
mission and what many HR practitioners often do or feel
they have to do. And so I'm curious.
I know when you and I spoke offline, we talked a lot about
really how employees can navigate layoff moments,
severance and things like that. And, and I bring it up because
we are in the midst of a layoff series on my podcast.
And so you are actually closing out this series for us because
naturally severance and separation agreements are the
last step, unfortunately, in a layoff process.
But I know that one of the things that you do support
employees with in DGA is navigating their severance,
navigating the terms of their separation agreements.
What are some things that you often see that are examples of
people potentially being taken advantage of?
And counter to that, what are some things that you often
advise people look out for or do if they are in the midst of this
process to receive a severance once they sign a separation
agreement? Absolutely, absolutely.
The first and most important thing is to really understand
what severance is about and why it's offered.
It's literally misrepresented in a massive way.
The the employee has something the employer seeks and is
willing to pay a lot of money for.
Thousands, 10s of thousands. I've had clients who've gotten
hundreds of thousands of dollars for signing their severance
agreement. So the first thing is to sort of
level the playing field to be on the same playing field that you
have something the employer seeks your, your name on a, on a
release of liability and claims your promise to never sue.
In essence, once you sign a severance is it's as if you
never existed to the company. You're giving up all your rights
and all your claims. They presented as the opposite.
They presented as they're doing you a favor that they, they
care, they feel bad, they're helping you transition it really
it it couldn't be further from the truth.
They do it for their own selfish reasons to have you sign a
release of claims. And once you do, you didn't
exist. So the first thing is, let's get
on the same playing field. Let's understand what the game
is, why they offer severance, who benefits from it, and then
attempt to negotiate from that stance.
So that that would be the very first thing is that most people
don't understand why they offer severance.
You know who benefits from it? They don't even know that you
can negotiate it. A majority of people don't even
know that you can negotiate it. And they've been, they've been
conditioned to faint this way. It's a lack of information,
misinformation that's purposely provided.
So, you know, as far as how to prepare for it, you know, if you
know that a termination is coming, I say start building a
case to respond to it. You know, if it's a legitimate
termination and it's just, you know, business has been bad and
they need to lay some people off.
And there's no nefarious actions that are driving it behind the
scenes that you're being included in a rift that you
might not be otherwise, Then that's OK.
These things have to happen. And hopefully your employer will
give you a decent severance package and you'll go off and
sign it and be done. But the people who come to me,
it's, it's often not the case that they shouldn't have been
included in the Rif or they've been targeted or they've been
retaliated against or they or they're, this is being done
because they've gone on too much paternity leave and use the
benefits that they want to promote as being a great
progressive company. But if you use them too much,
then, you know, then there's a problem here.
I've heard that many, many times I've worked with 50-60 different
people around a parental leave being retaliated against for
taking too much of it. So, yeah, I mean, those are the
things that, you know, be prepared, you know, gather,
gather your information, understand, you know, if there
are nefarious reasons behind your termination, what they are,
call it out. If you're working in a toxic
work environment, describe what's going on so that it's not
your word versus their word. It's you've built out a
compelling case of a dozen different examples of how you've
been treated unfairly, unevenly, in a discriminatory way, in a
bullying, in a toxic way. So, yeah, I, I can appreciate
what you're saying. I mean, I fortunately have never
worked for an employer where I've had to make a decision or
terminate someone for nefarious reasons.
And I can say pretty confidently that if I was ever asked to do
that, I probably would not be working at that type of company
because certainly they exist, but that's not really where my
values align. And I can only, you know, I have
AI, have a microphone here. So I can only share my own
experience. I'm sure that there are
listeners who are like, oh, no, I've had to do that.
Or yeah, I agree. I would never want to do that.
So it's easy for me to say that I, you know, I'm lucky.
I can go and I can find another job if someone were to ask me to
do that. But I, and I'm also lucky, I
think, in some ways that I've never had to.
But I know when you and I first spoke that you have very strong
opinions that these things when when people are terminated for
nefarious reasons or as a way to cover up other things, because
we do know what happens. We see these lawsuits come about
all the time. So there's no denying that.
And I my point here is that there it does, I think, send
this message or create the stigma that that is the case in
all companies. So I know I kind of want to get
into this concept and idea that you have around really H Rs
purpose, because I obviously am of the belief that as a
practitioner, I there are sometimes when where
unfortunately I have to terminate someone, but I'm of
the belief that those are for sound reasons and or it's
performance. Obviously that's the sound
reason and, or it's something that you know, from a, an
execution standpoint that I'm able to provide an empathetic
approach. Now I know from speaking with
you, this is really what I want to get into, that there is a, a
perception potentially that no matter who it is, like HR
practitioners don't really care that much because this is just
their job. So because we're, we're talking
about this, I want to hear from you directly.
Like do you what do you believe H Rs purpose is in the workforce
or in the workplace? And do you believe that there is
a way for an HR practitioner actually to care about that
person on the receiving end of a difficult conversation or a
terminating conversation? All righty.
So a lot there. First of all, I I want to say
that the people who in general work in HR are generally good
people. I actually feel for them a lot
of times they want to do the right thing and they're being
pressured in a really nasty way by leadership to not do it.
And their morals and values are compromised on a regular basis.
And their choice is to leave and be unemployed and go find
another place that may be the same way.
So I, I, I truly do feel for HR. There's a, there's a lot of good
people out there and they just have one of the toughest jobs.
They're squeezed in, in two or three different directions.
But ultimately, when push comes to shove, most of them, you
know, have to take care of themselves as most people would
do. And that's why this sort of
farce of employment and HR exists in a lot of ways, and a
lot of employees are left tricked as a result of it.
You know, as far as the purpose of HR, it's clear what the
purpose is. It's just misrepresented as
something different. It's represented that they're
there to help resolve conflict. They're there to help employees
navigate their employment, to make sure that they're treated
fairly and to help resolve disputes that that people should
feel comfortable going to them and opening up and, and talking
about things that are bothering them.
And I, I, I could not disagree more with that.
I, I, if, if you go to HR and open up and you're causing,
there's a complaint, there's an issue, there's something they
need to look into. You're creating work for them.
You're creating friction. You're, you're, you're, you're,
you're creating a problem that they need to take action to,
especially if it's against senior leadership.
I mean, 9 times out of 10, they are going to side with
leadership every single time. And it may not appear on the
surface that way, but you know, 2-3 months down the road, all of
a sudden you're getting pipped out of the blue and you're being
let go and you're wondering what just happened.
And the only thing that's different than when you were
getting awards and performances 6 months ago is that you filed A
complaint with HR. So I mean, you know it with me.
I just think that, you know, HR has a role and I respect the
role. My biggest frustration is the
lack of transparency, the trickery that that people, the,
the younger employees, I was this way.
I went to HR my first couple of years out of work and that was
an issue. And I went in there, I talked to
them, I opened up, they were empathetic.
Nothing ever happened. It was as if I the conversation
never even took place. But I have a feeling that the
conversation did come back around to my manager and he knew
it took place. And this is what happens.
They work together. The HR business manager works in
cahoots with your manager to manage you out of the business
when the manager has decided they don't want you there
anymore. Rather than being honest and
transparent and coming to you and saying, hey, we appreciate
you, we value you, your employee at will, whether you are or not,
You know, we've made a decision that it's time to let you go.
But we respect and value and we're going to treat you
accordingly. We're going to give you the next
couple of months to go find a job while you're still an
employee because it's a lot easier finding a job when you
have a job and after and you can decide to work or not.
There's, you know, projects that you're working on, you want to
complete. There's deals that you're trying
to close that you want to get that Commission.
Go ahead. If you don't want to do
anything, that's fine too. If after that couple of months
you haven't found a job, we're going to give you a severance
package. It's going to be a fair and
reasonable one. And then you go off.
There's not an employee in the world that would not be forever
grateful to that organization for treating them that with that
respect and transparency and decency that they deserve.
Instead, they go on these campaigns.
I mean, I've talked to people who've worked at places for 32
years, 10 years, 20 years. And just in order to save a
little bit of money on severance to manage them out of the
business. So you don't pay unemployment
or, or, or, or, or a severance. They literally wipe away years
or decades of positive relations, work that they're
proud of, things that they reflect back positively on.
And that is all wiped away in a matter of a couple of months as
they manage you out of the business, wrongfully terminates
you to save you a little bit of money rather than being honest
and transparent with you. As an HR professional, I know
that managing HR for a workforce comes with its challenges, and
managing a global workforce even more so.
Using multiple tools for different countries and employee
types complicates everything. Costs go up, efficiency goes
down, you get the picture. Deal is here to change that.
That's DEEL. Whether you're an enterprise,
business, a small company, or anything in between, Deal
simplifies global team management, payroll, hiring and
more. Deal HR streamlines your global
operations with built in compliance to lower costs and
maximize efficiency with self-service onboarding.
New hires can be up and running in minutes, sign documents,
track expenses and approve PTO in seconds.
Plus with deal, you can easily oversee global cost reviews,
headcount and more with centralized reporting.
Ready to see how deal HR can transform your global operations
for free? Head to deal.com to book a demo
today. That's D eel.com well there.
First of all, thank you for sharing your opinions on this.
It's, you know, I know that there are probably listeners who
are like really annoyed hearing your opinion, but that's OK.
I think it's really important that we hear from someone that
doesn't fully like, like believe in the things that we probably
believe in. So there are some things that I
agree with you on. There's some things that I also,
I think just fortunately, because of my experience, I
disagree with you on. Now, the things that I agree
with you on are that there needs to be transparency.
People would be forever grateful if they were clearer on where
they actually stood performance wise with an organization or if
there was an impending termination coming.
I know I would appreciate that and I know I think probably
everyone would appreciate that. So I totally, totally agree with
that. And I think most of where HR
gets it wrong and leaders in general get it wrong is when
they think that being transparent is going to bite
them in the end or in the moment, rather than seeing that
as a way to actually just be, you know, a decent human being
about what is eventually going to impact someone's, you know,
circumstances. Now obviously there's always
going to be a caveat to every situation, whether it's
something with confidentiality or whatever.
But in most cases, I do agree that transparency is where a lot
of these things are not even issues Because if someone's
like, hey, this isn't going to work out this like I don't even
want to put you on a PIP. I think you should just know
that this is not going to work and you should take this as
notice To me. I don't see any problem with
that. As an HR practitioner, I've done
that and I've suggested to leaders to do that with people
that they've had to manage out now.
How about why it's not going to work out?
Well, that I, to me, I think that's part of the conversation.
I'll give you an example. And this is also where I think
I'll share where on some levels I disagree with some of your
perspective. But this is really because of my
own experience. I can only speak about my own
experience, but I, I have had in the past employees who I really,
you know, considered friends and still consider friends whose
performance was not good and it wasn't improving.
And there had been, you know, hey, we need more of this.
We need more of that. Like just general conversations
with the manager, right? And I've been an HR business
partner. That's kind of how I see my role
in general as an HR practitioner.
And I, I would sometimes step in and say, listen, as a friend,
you've got to know that, you know, unless something
dramatically changes with your performance, something is going
to dramatically change about your employment.
And you should know like, that's probably like, it's not going to
really change unless something 180 changes.
And I, I have, I can say with 100% honesty that, that I've had
those conversations before. And people generally are like,
thanks, I'm going to go and find another job or Oh crap, I'm
going to have to do a much better job because now I know
I'm about to get fired. So I have had the fortune of
having managers who have been supportive of me having those
types of conversations. And I think I've learned from HR
practitioners who do challenge some of the things that you have
seen. Now the places where I would say
I disagree are that I do think that HR is placed in in most
companies, although of course we know that there are companies
who don't ever do the right thing and are really the
building, the building blocks of these stigmas.
But I do think my role specifically and the roles of
many of my colleagues is to provide support through conflict
and to resolve problems. And that that doesn't, is not
seen as work created and rather it's an opportunity to help
build that person up and resolve conflict in the workplace.
I do believe that I can understand that there are
obviously these stigmas because there's a farce and there are
some people who don't, you know, who don't live up to what I
believe we should be doing in the workplace.
That said, I think anyone listening who is in HR, I hope
that they don't just do things because they think that's what
they're supposed to do. I hope that they take critical
thinking and reasoning to their jobs every single day and
challenge people if they want them to do the the wrong things.
But again, it's easy for me to say because that's the type of
person that I am if someone asked me to do the wrong thing.
And I'll give you one last story before I let you share what you
might have on your mind. I had an experience with one of
the worst leaders I've ever worked with years ago who
specifically asked me to basically scrub the engagement
survey results for this like annual company survey and this
leader. This was probably like 8 years
ago already, so it's not someone that I luckily work with
anymore. And this particular leader was
like, don't ask those people there to take the survey because
they're going to respond poorly about me and the people that
already took the survey. Let's have them sign in as those
people and take the survey. And I was like, are you out of
your freaking mind? I'm not doing that.
And we literally, I kid you not, if this might be the first time
this is heard on the podcast, We got into a screaming match.
Like I was actually screaming and she was actually screaming
at me. I was like, you're not asking me
to do that. And by the way, I did, I did
report her and she eventually was not working for the company
anymore. This is probably the first time
I've shared this on this podcast.
I felt so strongly that she was asking me to do something not
only that was nefarious, obviously, but clearly wrong,
and also to me, something that totally took advantage of
employees. We should hear from everyone.
If this is a survey for the entire company, we've got to
hear from everyone. So that's an example of where
hopefully I'm not alone in saying, in being able to feel
confident and strong enough to say, no, you're wrong and I'm
not listening to you. But obviously not everyone is
able to do that. So I'll pause.
I shared a lot there and I know I saw you taking notes so I'm
sure you want to respond to some.
If I, if I can read them, I'll, I'll respond to them.
I mean, I, I, there's just so much to unpack here.
I mean, first of all, I mean, I, I appreciate you sharing your
experience. When I started this, I had no
expectation of what I was finding.
I didn't even start this myself. I just started posting about
topics on LinkedIn and the community forced me to start
this practice. They pleaded with me to start
this practice. So I mean, I mean, I don't know
where do I want to start here? Why is it when employees are let
go, the same people who were trusted, who respected, who are
valued, are instantly treated like a criminal that they're
literally that they're having, they're having their systems
shut down in the middle of the, of the, of the termination call.
They're having to complete it on a phone call.
They're walked out of the office, but yet 24 hours later
they were sharing confidential information.
I mean, it's just the employer is the one who creates this
toxic environment, this this combative stance that leaves
employees walking away feeling horrible and this is the last
thing that they want them to feel.
I mean. You know, I think with that
specifically, you know, this, you're probably not going to
like this response, but I do think that that is a reflection
of someone like one person creating this circumstance for
everyone else. Because like, let's take an
example of someone who tries to then download confidential
client information or something, right?
Like and then it becomes this, oh, we have to shut off systems
for everyone so they don't have access to those things.
I fully agree with you. It becomes this like.
So the reason why these things happen, the reason these things
happen is because the employees are being blindsided with these
terminations. And that's exactly what the
employer wants. If they were being treated with
respect and dignity as they as they have given throughout their
tenure, then there wouldn't be a concern about it.
So we basically saying that every employee who's ever worked
for you is a scumbag who's looking to steal stuff from you
and screw you over. And therefore, because one
person might have done it some other company, we're going to
treat every employee like this. I mean, aren't you saying the
same thing right now? That one bad company doesn't
mean that all companies are bad. Yeah, you're absolutely right.
You're absolutely right. Unfortunately, I think in a, a
world where competition, I mean, you, you have a sales background
also, you know, like competition is ever, if you can have a leg
up on the competition, you can make a ton of money.
And that's whether you're an individual or a business.
And so I, I really fundamentally from a values perspective, I
agree with you. People have to be treated with
dignity and respect just as they came in, in the way that they
go. And I believe that the people
who are off boarding off of a company should be treated the
same way that they were treated when they were on boarding.
Even if they did something that earned them a termination, like
they harassed someone or they stole or whatever, you people
are still people and you have to treat them kindly.
The only. Thing I want to talk about is
this thing about performance, right?
So and, and, and about managers and about Pips.
You know, I think it's an obligation of the manager to be
communicating with their employees on a regular basis,
that the employee should never be blindsided as a concern with
performance, that there should never be a need for a PIP.
If the manager is doing their job throughout, the employee
should already know that they're not performing well and that
they likely should be moving on. But that's 99 out of 100 times.
That's never the case. The manager doesn't do their
job. They don't interact on a regular
basis. They just give commands and
nitpicks and complaints, not support and guidance.
And then when things start to go bad, then it's all on the
employee. It's never on the manager.
And now they're being given an unrealistic time period to
improve on it. So you mentioned, you mentioned
performance. Performance is, is almost in
every instance it's being positioned as subjective.
I mean, despite the fact that when there's, there's hard, fast
KPIs, most Pips are filled with subjective criteria that a
majority of them that the employees never even asked to
do. And it's intended to manage you
out of the business so that if you can beat the, the, the real
number that they purposely make unachievable, maybe you got a
Bluebird and somehow got lucky. Well, now we can micromanage you
to death on these subjective things while you're on this PIP.
And then if you beat the real number, we can terminate you
because you didn't pass these micromanagement subjective items
that would have taken you away from actually getting the job
done in the 1st place. I mean, this is this.
I do know that I literally say the same thing to almost every
single person I speak to that comes to me on a PIP and I don't
even let them talk. I tell them this is what's going
on. They're like, Oh my God, how did
how did you literally just describe word for word what I'm
experiencing? It's the modus operandi.
Example. No, it's a great example
actually. For where HR leaders can be best
supporting employees because for example, when a leader, a
manager is not doing the right thing and they're like, OK,
well, you know, this person's not working out.
I just want to manage them out. That's when it's appropriate for
the HR partner to say no. How many conversations have you
had with this person? Do they know where they stand?
And if an, and this is really like for those listening who are
in HR, this is if you are not doing this with your managers,
you are part of the problem. You've got to have these
conversations with people so that people are not surprised.
And also with the pips. I totally agree.
If you're planning to manage someone out and they can do
nothing to improve their performance, just provide tell
them that provide them a very reasonable severance rather than
making them go through hoops to eventually not even show that
their performance has improved enough.
I'm. I'm like bursting at the seams
here. So do you.
So so you say provide them a severance.
Do you know what the new thing is that I just kind of came up,
became aware of in the last year?
I've now seen like 100 times it's they they come to you and
they tell you that, you know, we're not happy with your
performance. We're going to put you on this,
we're going to give you a choice.
You can choose to go on this unachievable Pip that you don't
deserve to be on, and we're purposely making it so that
there's not a chance that you can pass it.
If you ask your manager on the side of your mouth, they'll tell
you that you're gone already. Or you can choose.
See how I emphasize that word choose.
You can choose this severance, but you know what?
You chose it. So it's not a severance, it's
not a termination, it's a, a mutual resignation that you're
initiating, that you're initiating.
That is not your desire, not your intent, that you're being
pressured by your employer to make this choice between two
horrible outcomes. And you don't even and, and, and
you're blindsided by it. You don't even know where it's
coming from. And now you've been told you got
till the end of the day, you've got 24 hours to choose whether
you want this unachievable PIP that we've dressed up as
impossible to achieve, or you can accept a severance that we
intentionally mislead you that you'll now find out when you
apply for unemployment in a month that you're not eligible
for it. That's that's what they do
instead of if you don't want to be on the PIP.
Well, that's interesting. I first of all, as a, from a
selfish perspective, as like an individual taking the HR hat
off, if someone were ever to offer that to me, I'd be like
manage me out, manage me out so that you get, you're going to
still provide me a severance. I'm going to have 30 more days
of pay and eligible for unemployment.
But The thing is. Most employees don't know this
is happening. I literally get on the phone
with them and I can tell you that 19 out of 20 people that
are going through this have no idea what I just told them.
They they are shocked and disgusted that this company that
they worked for years for is using these underhanded tactics
to trick them into a resignation that they're dressing up as a
termination with a that's. Bad, that's bad.
I can't I you know, here's the thing.
If someone I could see trying to think like with some nuance here
and I guess using my own critical thinking advice, I
could see if someone is really actually not performing and
they've had discussions, let's say, and it's been overt and
transparent and the company is like, look, either you can, we
can manage you out over the next 30 days or we can just call it
now and we won't fight unemployment.
I could see that if a company is being reasonable because to me,
I think unemployment is a major concern for most people.
And a lot of people don't realize that if they resign,
they most of the time are not eligible for unemployment.
And this is where like if someone has a really good HR
partner, they can say, will I be eligible for an unemployment?
But what you're saying, and kind of what I'm saying too, is that
if people don't have that savviness about them or they
don't have someone being honest with them, they don't know.
They're being purposely misled. Literally.
When you hear severance, you think termination, unemployment,
they're believe me, if they actually said to you, well, you
can go on a PIP or you can choose to resign, Why aren't
they saying what it really is? They're purposely not to
intentionally trick people into screwing themselves over and not
having unemployment when they thought they were going to get
it. And they're they're purposely
giving them misinformation to make those decisions on.
I mean, the same it goes with. So I mean, it applies with so
many things. I mean, we've talked about this
before. I mean, employment agreements of
which you could be a person of color with a disability, you
know, in a protected class with a veteran.
You know what with, with, with, with, with whatever it is.
And they make you sign an employment agreement that says
that you're an employee at will and can be terminated any time
for any reason. It's not true.
You know, the comp plans that they make you sign that they'll
literally threaten to withhold earn compensation.
That's illegal to do, previously earned that.
They'll threaten to withhold that if you don't sign this comp
plan. So they give you this perception
that it's a legal binding contract that both parties will
abide by. But in the back of the contract,
it says that the employer can change the terms of this
agreement at any time with or without notice or consent.
So how is it a legal contract? It's not.
By definition, it's not. An attorney on here so we can
hash this out too. What I will say is that I think
it's like 48 states that have this at will. 49. 49 right.
So at will and, and I've said this to listeners too, the at
will law doesn't mean that you can just terminate anyone.
And to your point, this is really what you're saying that
it's it you can't just let someone go, you know, there has
to be a justification when you terminate someone even in an at
will state. Only only if you're in a
protected class. Well, most people are of a
protected class. Everyone has a, you know, a
gender every like if you have to prove discriminations, everyone
has some affiliation to any of the protected classes, right?
Someone could prove the difficulty is proving
discrimination. This is where people find
themselves in a bit of a pickle because someone, a company
that's doing nefarious things can say, oh, sorry, we're
terminating you. No notice, no care in the world,
no empathy. Fine.
Now they know those those companies doing the wrong thing
know that it's extremely difficult to prove
discrimination and wrongful termination unless there's an
abundance of clarity and written documentation, all of this stuff
that people can support their argument for.
But to your point, and what I'm trying to say here too, is that
just because you're in an AT will state doesn't mean that you
can just terminate anyone Willy nilly.
I don't believe that to be the case.
Now, obviously the law in those states allows and is kind of
like employer employers heavy because it allows the employer
to make business decisions more freely.
But again, there has to be, if you ask me from like an HR
perspective, there has to be a reason why you're terminating
someone. For example, if a company is
going through a rift, which is a reduction in force for those who
might not know, there has to be a process to determine who is
part of that rift. Either you're looking at numbers
and performance, or you're looking at first, last in, first
out. Like there has to be some sort
of justification. It can't be this person's worked
for us the longest, this person's the oldest, this
person, like that's where you come into discrimination
territory. So that said, obviously I'm not
an attorney there. There are places within the laws
that people take advantage. And then there are places within
the laws of where people are abundantly conservative like we
see in California and New York, which are extremely litigious
States and states that tend to lean toward in for, I should
say, in favor of the employee. There are more protections in
those states for employees, but in other states like Florida,
Texas, and some states throughout the Midwest, like
those protections are not necessarily there.
So employees really unfortunately do have to be very
knowledgeable when they are engaging in any type of
relationship with an employer to really know what their rights
are. I think we're kind of saying the
same thing, but unfortunately a lot of people don't know.
And I think that's where it's really great that you are
helping people as they are navigating these things in their
careers and in their experiences, which takes me to
probably one of my last questions for you because I've
probably made you totally lose your mind at this point on the.
Podcast Not at all. Not at.
All OK, good. When we think about layoffs and
the separation agreements and the severance and all that, when
you are advising people on how to navigate those things to make
the most of those moments and really squeeze the lemon for all
of its juice, what do you typically advise?
Because by the way, for anyone listening, if you ever do see a
separation agreement, you have time to review it.
Do not let anyone pressure you. And especially if you're over
the age of 40 in certain states, you have an extra long period of
time to review. But anyway, Dan, going back to
that question, what do you typically advise?
Yeah. So just, I just want to clarify
a few things. So, so when you're under 40,
they can give you as little time as they want to review the
agreement. They can pressure you to say,
hey, you have until the end of the day or else you don't have
it. Now, whether that's right to do
or not, they have no legal obligation to offer severance
when you're over 40. They have an obligation to give
you 21 days to review it and seven days to revoke it if
you're laid off by yourself. If you're terminated with just
one other person, it's considered a group layoff and
you're allowed 45 days to review it and seven days to revoke.
I think the caveat is California, I think under 40
they have a certain minimum. But anyway, yes, there there are
I think. We'll have to I, I, I don't
know. I've, I've worked with 100
people from California that had these issues and I, I, I, I have
not come across that. So you may be right.
There's a lot of there's a lot of one off flaws in, in 50
states all over the place. So San Francisco.
Versus California on the whole. But anyway, go ahead please.
Yeah, I, I think I just lost my train of thought that we, we'll
no worries, no. Worries you were clarifying the
point on time to review and then I had asked you what you.
Typically died, Yeah. Yeah.
I mean, you know, you, you want to basically be honest with
yourself and with the company, you know, assess what really
went on here. You know, I mean, companies do
have a right to let employees go.
There are plenty of employees that perform poorly and deserve
to be let go. So be honest with yourself, you
know, and there's a lot of instances where companies are
acting poorly and targeting employees and terminating and
who don't deserve to be. And in those instances, stand up
for yourself. In general, when it comes to
severance, most employees either don't know that you can
negotiate it, don't know how to go about it, don't want to be
bothered with it, are too traumatized about what happened,
have already moved on to the next job and we don't want to
and want to leave it behind them.
So as a result, most employee employers do not offer what
they're willing to pay if you can put together a compelling
reason why it's in their best interest to offer more.
And what I'm talking about is basically finding some meat on
the bones, being able to articulate in a strong,
assertive way, you know, perhaps wrongdoing that took place that
led to your termination when it was a toxic work environment,
retaliation, targeting, compensation, theft,
discrimination. There's lots of different, what
I call my buckets of wrongdoing. And you can build out your,
your, your facts and details of what you endured and have that
ready to present to use as a motivation and leverage to
negotiate a better offer. The National Labor Relations
Board ruled in February of 2023 that non disparagement
agreements are no longer offered or allowed in severance
agreements. I probably looked at 1000
severance agreements in that time period.
I've seen one that proactively addressed it correctly and
clearly. I've seen, you know, probably
100 that, you know, kind of just referred to the change in law,
but didn't say what it was or where to find it.
You see what I'm saying? So employees, you know, if
you're not in a managerial position, you're not considered
a highly paid employee. You have the right to share your
truthful experience. You have no obligation to hide
wrongdoing by the employer. And if people realize that, they
people realize, think that if I sign my severance, they're
buying my silence. They're not.
Employers need to make advocates of their employees, make fans of
their employees. There's no better word of mouth
advertisement than a former employee saying what a great
company it is and how well they treated me when I left.
So true. You know, it's so easy to do.
It takes so little to do the right thing.
And you know, that stays with the employee, both good and bad.
And what you don't want to do is create a long line of enemies of
former employees that have a grind with you and want to see
you fail. So, so treat them with dignity
and respect. Take care of them.
Value the time that they put in and, and, and be honest and
transparent. And if they're no good, then
manage them properly throughout their tenure.
Don't blind side them. And then now put all the onus on
them to improve all of a sudden like that when they haven't been
doing a good job the whole time and you haven't communicated
with them. Right, right.
So I agree. I agree 100%.
It costs nothing to be kind, as they say.
And I think you know, the the more honest and transparent we
can be and that we are, the better off everyone is in every
circumstance. And the the truest thing that
has been said is that the best, the best case scenario is that
you have people leaving a company feeling really warm
about their experience and being converted into fans of the
company who want to see the company prosper and the people
that make the company prosper continue to prosper too.
You don't. I agree 100%.
You don't want a line of enemies standing outside of your door at
all. So if anything goes listening, I
hope that you were able to have some of your deeply held beliefs
maybe turned on their heads a bit.
Maybe you felt a little challenged.
Maybe you felt like you were totally aligned with Dan.
Maybe you've actually had your own experiences where you've
dealt with difficult circumstances.
Dan, do you want to say anything on?
That I have consulted with probably close to a dozen HR
professionals. Chief people, Officers V PS DEI
folks. I'm telling you that they it
happens to everybody. Presidents of companies, Chief,
Chief revenue officers V PS HR people.
I will tell you one thing. Every person I've worked with in
HR has had a highly successful outcome.
They know where all the bodies are buried, they know all the
underhanded tactics that employers use, and they use this
information and their argument back to get a better offer.
Wow. Well, they're lucky to have you
supporting them. But I had a feeling you were
going to mention this because that I've, I personally know
people who have been burned who are in HR and have been burned
by companies that don't do the right thing consistently.
So I think, as I said at the top of our recording, I think it's a
wonderful thing when people have mentors and advocates and people
on their side, whether in or outside of the business.
So thank you for supporting employees when maybe some of our
colleagues are not doing that to begin with.
So with that, Dan, if someone wants to learn more about you or
have a conversation or maybe they need your support, where
can they find you and connect? Yeah, I mean, I, I live every
day, all day long. And LinkedIn in my DM box, you
know, I've got a website, you know, you can, I've got a type
form that people fill out that they can seek help or assistance
across 8 different practice areas.
You know you'll, you'll go to a specific type form for that
specific practice area. My website is dangoodmanea.com.
You can find me on LinkedIn. Dan Goodman, Employment Advisory
is also on LinkedIn. Yeah, I, I, I, I post twice
every day about topics that people need to hear about.
If you're, if you have, if you're an employee.
I post every day at 8:23 and 6:53 at night.
And yeah, I'm not going anywhere.
I'm having the time of my life. It's the most impactful work of
my life. And every day is a joy.
And I'm helping people every day.
And I, I, I feel and see the impact every day.
So that's. Amazing.
That's amazing. Well, congratulations on all of
your success and thank you for bringing some really interesting
discussion to the podcast. Really appreciate your time.
And we'll have all of those links in the show notes for
everyone to easily click click as well.
Thank you so much, Dan. Thank you for having me, it was
a great time. Hey, just before you go, don't
forget to subscribe to the show so that you are the first to
hear when an episode drops each week and maybe leave a five star
review and a comment about how much you loved this episode.
Plus, if you have someone in mind who would really enjoy this
episode, make sure you share it with them.
Thank you so much for tuning in and I'll see you next week.