Friday, October 19, 2007

Severance Insurance

Following up on my last blog which ended with my obvious confusion in trying to identify why severance insurance actually benefits fired workers, let me ask a pretty unpopular question. Is severance, as it is known today, what it was intended (and expected) to be? Or are fired workers getting a sweet deal simply because corporations are scared that if they don't give them what they want, they'll sue. I know I'm not so far off the mark here because most corporations require a worker who is eligible for severance to first sign a general release and waiver (so that they can't sue) before they actually get their severance. Have the lawyers driven severance away from what it was originally designed to do and turned it into a "give me what I want or I'm going to sue your ass" handout.

I'm just beginning to think that the severance insurance guys might be onto something and that maybe they are being driven by the reality that severance has become a separation bonus and that corporations need to wake up and realize that they're getting hosed.


No comments: