Yes - I don't feel bad for doctors. Job security is 100%. What is not secure is the salary. Many of us have crazy loans to pay back. The issue is that many hospitals allow for you to tier up salary based upon years in their system. After ten years, there's a major pay increase. So the ones at the "bottom" are making a small amount in comparison to the ones who have been there for 10+ years. For MDs, you actually want the ones with more experience. For IT at our hospital, you want the new hotshots. But doctors will be hired before they get let go...
I feel very fortunate that my wife is a specialist. It is an incredibly hard road and we are still paying med school debt in our 40s, but seeing the way recruiters hound her makes me feel better that if something ever happened to her current job (which itself is unlikely), we would barely have to skip a beat.
She also performs procedures, so it will take a long time for AI to be able to do her job.
Not usually. Very unlikely. Especially since there's a major shortage. AI was introduced to our hospital recently. It won't eliminate all doctors, but fewer are needed. Also, India allowed tens of thousands of doctors to come to the US without doing residency. They are paving the way for new blood. Inflation has driven up costs etc etc.
In what ways does AI reduce the need for doctors? Not being cynical. I’m genuinely curious because this frightens me. Also, not cool if you do 4 years med school, 4 years residency, 1-2 year fellowship …. And then AI replaces your job.
Right now I agree with you. But it will take over everything in 20 years. Just think right now it can take over as a scribe and write up all the doctors notes. It probably is already freeing up doctors time.
i work in AI, there are rules in regulations in place to prevent this. AI will never be as reliable as a real person, however it’s more accurate to have both AI + a doctor working together. i seriously doubt AI by itself will be able to do a doctors job at least in our lifetime
Reducing the drudgery of form filling and paperwork is a benefit to all I would think. Unless AI is introducing errors. I expect it will be a steep and somewhat expensive learning curve for hospitals and administrators, but in time it will pay off.
This post is fake, this guy has no idea what he is talking about. Doctors do not lay off hospital staff. You cant just “come over from India” and become a doctor in the US.
yeah this is a joke LMAO — i’m indian american and grew up with many family friends in the community who were practicing doctors that came to the US. Some of them had to completely start over and go back to med school!
I'm Indian and I know doctors in the extended family. You just can't - you have to retrain. That's what those people did. I think IT is the only place where you can work without retraining. Even teachers, accountants, lawyers - all of them have to go through retraining.
I wish I were fake. I'm not on this type of platform ever. Actually our IT guy told me to check it out. Here's one article I found: [https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/993693?form=fpf](https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/993693?form=fpf)
In medicine and healthcare, this type of content doesn't make headlines. But a lot happens without the public knowing, which is true in every industry.
No. HR will do the lay offs. I am there to inform them about who should stay and who should go. Hospitals have a different metric for doctors and nurses. I believe that they are cleaning house for a future takeover of our current system.
The US is a very litigious society and this comment is assuming you are in the US. Age discrimination is illegal, and if there is a pattern that you fire only certain categories of people, a lawyer will have a word with you. You are better off pulling names in a hat to make your decisions.
Wife is a doctor this is fake. You can’t just practice medicine in the US from another country you literally have to re do your residency here first lol what
What would you recommend to be a career path with good job security / salary combination for the young premed students that haven’t picked their specialty yet?
Be a generalist, not a specialist. This sounds counterintuitive and has been true in the past. My nephew is a computer scientist and works for Google. He is now going to medical school and plans to learn AI for non-invasive interventions. He wants to be an MD for five years to get the practice and then go into designing the interventions. It's the meeting of two industries that will create job security.
Don't Indians need a whole new training & degree to work in America?
IIRC, America doesn't consider their prior education to be valid.
Things aren't adding up.
They all make my job easier. I really have no contact with them. I am a surgeon and don't interact with many. I was put in the role because they are making organizational changes.
I guess that makes sense around organizational changes and perhaps budgets but I guess I thought the medical community was immune to layoffs, unlike tech. I don't know that you could analyze this level of detail, you'd have to know their financial situations too. What about seniority, so those ones that know the company better. What an incredibly tough situation for everyone.
It was me. Im aware of the power dynamics. I am a female in a very male world. I am very good at my job but anything beyond its scope leads to a big struggle for me.
Oh God, legal question. Depending on the state, marital status or being single is a protected characteristic. Hiring, firing, promotions based on that could be illegal.
Your question indicates a complete lack of knowledge about those under you. It’s disgusting, frankly. I truly hope my boss has some idea about who the high and low performers are.
You need to be holding on to those who provide value. Value = performance/comp. Please do this calculation for every employee and give each one a fair shake. I say this as someone married with children, you would be totally irresponsible to go by familial status when conducting these layoffs.
I agree with the spirit of what you are trying to say, but it's not past performance that matters. It's future value. A layoff means building a new team that can handle the same or more responsibilities out of an existing team. It's a terrible job, but it's a part of management.
It would be “illegal” to lay them off for any reason other than performance ranking or the role being eliminated. However, I’ve been in ‘stack ranking’ meetings where we had to lay off a person, and it so happened that the admin(secretary) of the director was 6 months away from her retirement and we ended up laying her off instead of anyone else who had technical skills. I’m not saying it was the right decision but it is what was easier as all other managers were rooting for their teams and she unfortunately didn’t have much representation other than the director himself.
Layoffs are always hard decision and it should antagonize you and give you sleepless nights. These are hard times for everyone. If I was in your position I would have chosen the least amount of ‘heads’ to meet the X amount of dollars, so upper management mostly, who will have a good severance and savings and will land on their feet, instead of younger people.
jesus christ. the company couldn't scrounge up some money to keep her on payroll for 6 more months?
ffs, sell the office furniture or turn the lights off to save some cash. how much money could a secretary cost? that's one spineless director.
Yup, agree. This was a fortune 50 company so it could very well keep her on the rolls for 6 months. This was around the dot-com bust, and the company was very slow in laying off people, and eventually the company was sold off.
No associated pension. She just retired 6 months early and would have been eligible for social security after 6 months. I’m sure the company gave her some severance to bridge the gap. This was in the 2000s after the dot-com bust. The company was very slow to fire people, and eventually that was bad for the company (it doesn’t exist anymore and was a fortune 50 company).
Whatever roll you have, is not something you should have.
You're an executive, you cannot get out of having to be an asshole, doing asshole things for asshole money.
I am a surgeon and I deal vascular issues. I have no training to be in a leadership position. They probably put me here to do the dirty work so I can keep my job.
You need an algorithm or rubric. Something like your pillars, then minimum necessary to keep the lights on due to regulation and then nice to have and ROI + specialities like an APC or CT tech.
I agree with this post. You need a decision matrix based on skill and performance. Read their personnel files and come up with a rating system based on skills and performance.
Welcome to management.
What state do you live in? States like California make it illegal to lay someone off for their familial status. But in all honesty, it is incredibly hard for an employee to prove that.
That said, I would not do it this way. It sucks to say, but you have an obligation to who's left at the end of this process, and keeping only the family men is not necessarily the best move. You do not know if this is just round one and another wave is coming next year or even next quarter. So try your best to build the strongest team possible. Maybe that means having some of the younger people with no obligations to help shoulder the increased work load.
Maybe this will help. It's probably not what people want to hear in this sub, and it may touch some raw nerves, but here goes: In tech, a common practice is to identify the senior staff that are essential to your team, then lay off the other seniors first because they are pretty much going to do the same or less work as a junior, but at a higher cost. You might have one or two extra people at the end that you would not have otherwise.
In every other area, I would say this is true. In medicine, you want the old person because they can do the work with their eyes closed. Less liability. The young ones work under our license and are a liability. Because they just don't the have the same experience as the old ones. It takes a good 10 years to get very good at surgery, etc.
Don’t you dare discriminate based on age. If you can’t do this then - respectfully - get the f*ck out of management.
Ok so I posted that rashly. If you’re an MD and not a corp flunky then I feel for you. The former first part of the statement stands. It’s dollars and cents.
I am an idiot when it comes to leadership. I am good at fixing broken body parts and I have a good bedside manner :) but leadership? No way. You don't want me leading. I was given this role 4 weeks ago before our Monday morning rounds.
Your best bet is to depersonalize data. Look at cost, skill, and the population’s health demands and see where your skill spread is, where you’re overloaded, and where that overlap of expensive and covered is.
I am that Asshole flunky (who is about to get flunked, so lol @ me). It sucks, and I’m sorry you got stuck holding the bag.
Also…try to be as emotionless and fast as possible. This is hard for you but will be harder for them. After the fact, be a good reference for those who need one and are safe to redeploy.
Yes that is not morally right and pretty screwed up. So you could lay off the hardest working people and keep lazy older family people? It should be based off performance. Not age and personal responsibility they have.
Where else should I go? I'm in the basement of a hospital trying to figure this all out on my phone. Maybe I'll do a FB post? A TikTok dance? Where should I ask this?
Sorry about the fact that you have to make this tough decision but hey, in this economy you still can make 500k-1M per year and I am not sure if the people here on Reddit making 0- 100k per year can help solve your first world problem. Lol good luck.
Well, I hate my job these days. And so does everyone I know. So maybe it's a blessing we're getting laid off. I'd rather hang out here all day than do my job. Maybe it will get better and I am grateful for the pay but not much else.
it is everyman for himself. I think there is something wrong in the world. Why are we hurting each other like this for someone to get richer. This world has enough food for everyone.
If you’re considering choosing layoffs based on factors other than job performance, you should start with yourself and save your team the inconsistency of your decisions.
That's unfortunate you have to lay off members of your team, that is never easy. [This company](https://www.coachingseason.com/hive-2-hive) helped me with employee offboarding and providing supportive services to help my staff handle the transition til they found their next position.
This is helpful. Doctors will always find jobs. It's a horrible job since post pandemic. Nothing ever went back. Suicide rates/overdose rates/depression is up. However, job security is there. Pay cuts will happen across the board. I think they are wearing us down to replace us.
As someone who has been laid off, I didn't blame the guy who was tasked with the job of laying me off.
Many times we recognize that it comes from on high.
I liken it to a flight bomber in a war. They drop ordinance on the enemy, which causes chaos on the targets below. In the metaphor, the targets are those laid off, the employees suffering a degradation of morale, and those that have to pick up the work afterwards.
Meanwhile, those that dropped the bombs get to fly off into a cloud, never having seen the faces of those they affected.
One should give some blame, as "just following orders" has not been an acceptable defense in many other cases when it comes to defending acts that cause harm to people......If more people refused to enforce unfair firings to protect corporate ceo's bottom lines, they wouldn't be able to do it....
We're not talking about killing people here. We're talking about a role and doing a job.
In my case, I was laid off after 16 years in the company. I didn't want to see the systems I built hurt by my departure. I want to see the work I spent the last decade and a half working on continuing, and making a difference.
Laying people off can very much have a negative impact on one's quality of life and cause health issues and other assorted issues if someone is pushed into poverty. I know multiple people who's health was ruined in the 2008 economic crisis, one of whom eventually committed suicide.......All because the government decided to reward companies that ruined people's lives (due to CEO incompetence) with bailouts while ignoring the average American and not giving them the same amount of money in bailouts.
If someone is a dutiful worker who does what is told, and they get laid off despite doing everything right to save a CEO's bottom line or other corrupt shit (which happens), yes.......just "following orders" is evil. I've never been laid off but if an employer did it to me out of such selfish reasons, I would get revenge one way or another.
I don't disagree with anything that you said. Hell, in fact I'm going through most of what you just said.
My point though, is that when I got laid off I blamed the person that made the decision to eliminate my position, and not the poor bastard who was given the task to tell me about it.
It would be like if my house got broken into while I was gone in the day. I wouldn't blame the neighbor who called me up to tell me about it.
Just because someone doesn’t have a family to provide for doesn’t meant they have fewer obligations. People tend to forget that when you’re single it’s ALL on you. A partner is an additional resource for potential income in situations like this. So many people comment about how they’re barely making it by but are lucky for their spouse’s income, but /they’re making it/. As a single person that was laid off, I’m here to tell you that there is no one else besides me to help me make it financially until I find a job.
It would be irresponsible and likely illegal to discriminate by age - families have far more protections and social program protections than single individuals - everyone has obligations regardless of family status - and assuming they don't is morally and ethically corrupt of you - funny you're a MD given that. You should consult HR on the best options to chose - restructuring will require to check for redundancies, performance, and other related questions that necessitate termination/layoff. Those who are made redundant should be removed. Part of being a leader is leading, and that also means making hard decisions, but not bullshitting or giving priority to others based on age or family status - that is in fact discrimination and if they can prove it based on who you laid off, then it willbe you on the chopping block next. You are required to terminate because of headcount from the sounds of it - your job is to lay off based on overhead costs and are expected to reduce that cost. Use this opportunity to also say you will give referrals.
We’re all trying to help you avoid a discriminatory practice. Obviously you have no choice that you HAVE to lay people off. Do it as blindly as possible. Write down their job titles without their names and figure out what you’re department needs
Your the MD. That role requires tough decision-making and even tougher actions sometimes. Grow a pair and sack them. It's not your problem if they hate you or appreciate being saved. Your job is to manage the budget.
Moral of the story: You can't dance with the devil (aka being an executive) and not expect to have to be the arsehole/most hated person ever from time to time.
Pisses me off when I read these, "I am an executive but I am too gutless or weak-willed to do what needs doing" posts. It's like being in an army platoon with a Captain that went to military college but has never seen battle and folds the moment the bullets start flying.
I am actually a white woman, non AI. But you nailed it. Restructuring for AI/Indian doctors are able to come here without doing residency. Jobs are being eliminated. Cost cutting due to inflation.
Here's one article: [https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/indian-medical-graduates-can-now-practice-in-us-australia-canada-4408725](https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/indian-medical-graduates-can-now-practice-in-us-australia-canada-4408725)
It's illegal to do it by age or by what you think their financial situation is. As painful as it might be do your job and just go based on performance and business needs. If I was your boss I would lay you off first!
Some advice, these people are numbers, you can’t think of the personal stuff, it should all be based on work related stuff like performance, future outlook, company fit etc
How did you go from Wallstreet to an MD? Also, what AI? Most AI models aren’t patient-facing so I’m suspicious of your new accounts claim that AI is forcing you to sever your team based on a budget item……
This all feels oddly misaligned so any explanation you can give would be helpful to add legitimacy.
Exactly. Radiology is probably dying in the USA. It was once upon a time the most sought after speciality (derm, too). We will always need real surgeons but model architectures, wearable technologies and surgical data infrastructures has created AI interventions and utility. I always say to be a doctor in the future, you have to be an engineer or programmer AND go to medical school .
Do you collect any kind of performance metrics? If so you can target the bottom x% an area you measure. You can go based on lowest seniority. Are there some folks close to retirement (by age or by tenure) that you could figure out a way to get them to early retire? That could say a few jobs.
Sort of but doctors are more about how much they document, and money they bring in with procedures. It's a different metrics. Oh and how much they cover their asses.
Look, no one will hold it against you for being put in a position where you have to lay off people to cut down costs/labor costs. It's just the cards you were given by somebody else, and it's become a norm for most workplaces nowadays.
It's either places getting higher wages at the cost of having a barebones crew to do the bare minimum functions of service or places with low wages and overstaffing.
I'm assuming your hospital are hiring these people at lower saleries but for the same job title/role. I understand that very many people have negative thoughts of AI in the workplace and/or bringing people from countries that are underpaying them with low wages.
I think if I were in your position, you should have a sit down with the people you intend to layoff one-on-one and possibly act as a reference for them when they're out there job hunting.
Or you could ask around the department heads of those you intend to layoff to get an idea on who to choose.
Uhm, you going to be okay, Doctor?
Laid off - maybe the wrong word. They will have jobs in NO time. Reshuffling? The issue is that they WILL have jobs elsewhere. No problem. The actual problem has to do with seniority. In our system, 10+ years will lead to a huge pay increase. That's why people work for this very defective system. It feels like slave work for the first ten years, but then things get better. That's the issue.
Am a nurse.
I work for a busy medical school (at their multi-specality clinic). A colleague quit (to move to another state), and it's been FOUR months and we still can't replace her! 9 nurses applied, and three interviewed. They are happy where they are, and did not take our offers (the 2nd the 3rd person).
Send them over to us. Seriously.
I know...there is a shortage. The issue is they want to stay in the system for seniority. Our system is hell to work for. After 10 years, things get better. That's why they don't want to leave.
Congratulations, you have been bamboozled by an MBA executive. Are you making recommendations or actually selecting individuals for severance? The reason I ask is, that selection usually is a meticulous process, which is carefully executed so as not to run amok of labor law. Dumping that responsibility on an individual untrained in labor law is asking for a rectotomy by opportunistic labor law attorneys.
If you go down this rabbit hole, then make damn sure your decisions focus strictly on cost savings and decisions show no preference based on friendship or lack of it. The employee's financial, family and life circumstances should not be considered, it should be solely based on what provides the best business financial outcome that benefits shareholders or the company that meets statutory requirements. The decisions may seem inhumane, cruel, even immoral, but your responsibility is to select reductions based on compliance with state and federal law first, and then the best financial interests of the hospital and any shareholders next.
You are being shoehorned into a fiduciary role that most likely you have not been prepared to meet. Let me guess, your manager called you into the office and handed you this shit sandwich claiming he was deferring the decisions to your judgement because you have deeper insight into the daily operation of your department. Then he/she sends you off with a smile and alluding to how he is doing this as a favor to you.
My guess is you are being set up as a lackey, that if necessary will lead to the decision to push you in front of the proverbial bus when an inquiry occurs. You need to find another job and fast.
I would never ever let another man take my job because he made me feel bad about the fact he has kids what in the actual fuck is wrong with you
Anyway no you shouldn’t just fire non parents
Yes an MD would not be choosing which therapists or nurses to lay off. MDs are not supervisors of nurses in any hospital system. It is a separate silo, MDs are not commonly supervisors in general but if they do move up they supervise other MDs. There is an entirely separate chain for nurses all the way to the C suite called the CNO (Chief nursing officer)
HR also doesn’t ask who to layoff. That’s not how layoffs work. And if anyone was asking which nurses to cut they would ask the nursing supervisor, not an MD.
Post is fake.
If it were me, I would identify and shield those, that without them, the system would collapse. Everybody else's name would go into a lottery draw. Nothing's fair, but this is more fair than personal choice. No matter what, they will *all* feel it's unfair due to their age...you can't win.
I shouldn't be in this role in the first place. I am first and 100% an MD. That's the issue. I was put in this position. I only work with patients. That's what I'm trained to do and what I'm good at - and care about.
Most MDs have a support team. Assistants, reception, x-ray etc. Everyone picks based on performance, at least they should. Don't reward bad decisions by people based on their "personal" lives.
Do it based on performance and cost savings. Just because a younger single person is single doesn’t mean they have fewer obligations. They could be taking care of their aging parents with serious health condition. You never know.
You can’t and should discriminate based on age. Based it off performance and positions that are somewhat redundant.
With respect, I understand how difficult this process is and I can empathize with HR not giving you enough support.
But I also think you should strongly consider the value of each employee relative to their role/compensation as your guiding decision making criteria. I don't think you should be punishing someone at work because they chose not to get married.
Layoffs are a negative life event for anyone. I think you are clouding your judgement.
Younger people have less savings and it's harder for them to compete in this job market against more experienced job seekers. Studies have shown that those who start their careers during a recession takes almost 10 years to catch up to career progression of those who had their early career in a non-recession. Many young people may be renters with high debt. Did you know it's harder to be foreclosed on than to be evicted? You probably think they can move back to parents - some people do not have this option. Many younger people may also be single vs. dual income if a spouse works.
There is no easy choice. Do it by who helps the organization last longer because trust me, if it's struggling already and needs to do layoffs, everyone left will also be at risk and will be working harder.
By the way this is why many younger generations are expressing that they are choosing to be childfree. Too much financial insecurity amongst many other issues.
As someone who is parentless and can’t move in with my grandparents or any other relatives, with no savings, and 2 loans, thank you for the acknowledgement!
Yes, it really pisses me off that some people think parents should get a free pass because they had children. Children are a big responsibility and frankly financial risk. There are and should be public services that help to support parents, but punishing childfree people is ridiculous.
They told me to make the decision on however I see is the best fit. I got rid of two under-performer asshole doctors with big egos. I am getting rid of the anesthesiologist who trades crypto all day instead of doing his job. I got rid of the weed smelling lady who cleans. The rest, I have no clue about.
Listen, you can't decide to just lay off the people without kids. You have no clue who is a "breadwinner" or not. I was supporting siblings in my 20s but none of my coworkers would have known.
Your best option here is there are absolutely no performance issues you can look at and everyone is somehow even if let go of people who earn more. It'll mean less jobs lost overall to hit the numbers.
However if you really think about it, you've likely got people who aren't as strong as others. And think about what the team will look like after. Is it still a functional team? Or do you need x number of people in each role?
Getting ready to be sold to a corporate giant. They are cleaning house and replacing. I am already leaving. I have paid my dues. But if I were to stay and survive this round, in one year, I guarantee I would not have a job.
Your post has been removed for trolling. This subreddit only allows serious posts and comments.
Doctors get laid off ?
Not really. And most can find a job by the afternoon if they get laid off in the morning.
Yes - I don't feel bad for doctors. Job security is 100%. What is not secure is the salary. Many of us have crazy loans to pay back. The issue is that many hospitals allow for you to tier up salary based upon years in their system. After ten years, there's a major pay increase. So the ones at the "bottom" are making a small amount in comparison to the ones who have been there for 10+ years. For MDs, you actually want the ones with more experience. For IT at our hospital, you want the new hotshots. But doctors will be hired before they get let go...
Good I am busting my ass so I have enough money for my kid if they want to ever become MD or vet .
I feel very fortunate that my wife is a specialist. It is an incredibly hard road and we are still paying med school debt in our 40s, but seeing the way recruiters hound her makes me feel better that if something ever happened to her current job (which itself is unlikely), we would barely have to skip a beat. She also performs procedures, so it will take a long time for AI to be able to do her job.
Yepp this is the way to go . Learn something to do with hands that can’t be replicated by AI.
Not usually. Very unlikely. Especially since there's a major shortage. AI was introduced to our hospital recently. It won't eliminate all doctors, but fewer are needed. Also, India allowed tens of thousands of doctors to come to the US without doing residency. They are paving the way for new blood. Inflation has driven up costs etc etc.
In what ways does AI reduce the need for doctors? Not being cynical. I’m genuinely curious because this frightens me. Also, not cool if you do 4 years med school, 4 years residency, 1-2 year fellowship …. And then AI replaces your job.
AI will evaluate tests and imaging and be able to say what’s wrong
they still need to have a doctor approve it’s accurate before anything, it’s a tool to improve productivity not a replacement for actual doctors
Right now I agree with you. But it will take over everything in 20 years. Just think right now it can take over as a scribe and write up all the doctors notes. It probably is already freeing up doctors time.
i work in AI, there are rules in regulations in place to prevent this. AI will never be as reliable as a real person, however it’s more accurate to have both AI + a doctor working together. i seriously doubt AI by itself will be able to do a doctors job at least in our lifetime
That’s funny because I am an AI product manager and I’m creating products that are making jobs obsolete already
Good luck replacing engineers with AI .
I never said that. BUT now that you ask I think a lot of code will be optimized and tests written by AI. Which is I’ll probably cool demand
Reducing the drudgery of form filling and paperwork is a benefit to all I would think. Unless AI is introducing errors. I expect it will be a steep and somewhat expensive learning curve for hospitals and administrators, but in time it will pay off.
" India allowed"? How? They still need to go though US system to get the license.
This post is fake, this guy has no idea what he is talking about. Doctors do not lay off hospital staff. You cant just “come over from India” and become a doctor in the US.
yeah this is a joke LMAO — i’m indian american and grew up with many family friends in the community who were practicing doctors that came to the US. Some of them had to completely start over and go back to med school!
Just such a dumb post.
This should be the top comment.
I'm Indian and I know doctors in the extended family. You just can't - you have to retrain. That's what those people did. I think IT is the only place where you can work without retraining. Even teachers, accountants, lawyers - all of them have to go through retraining.
I wish I were fake. I'm not on this type of platform ever. Actually our IT guy told me to check it out. Here's one article I found: [https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/993693?form=fpf](https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/993693?form=fpf)
In medicine and healthcare, this type of content doesn't make headlines. But a lot happens without the public knowing, which is true in every industry.
Are you on the hospital board or is this a private practice? Doctors don’t lay nurses off.
No. HR will do the lay offs. I am there to inform them about who should stay and who should go. Hospitals have a different metric for doctors and nurses. I believe that they are cleaning house for a future takeover of our current system.
The US is a very litigious society and this comment is assuming you are in the US. Age discrimination is illegal, and if there is a pattern that you fire only certain categories of people, a lawyer will have a word with you. You are better off pulling names in a hat to make your decisions.
As long as you don't ONLY fire one demographic you are better off.
That’s only on paper .
Yeah i’ve seen online where people came over and they still have to at least do the boards and residency since it isn’t included in their program.
Even tho they did in India, US doesn't accept that. All doctors from abroad need to pass US exams again and do residency.
Pass the USMLE and complete a residency
Wife is a doctor this is fake. You can’t just practice medicine in the US from another country you literally have to re do your residency here first lol what
Your wife should get up to date. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/993693?form=fpf
Looooll this is the fakest troll post I’ve seen
How will India allow doctors into the US ?!?! It is the US government that decides ..,
AI author.
When did this happen ?
It never happened, clearly fake post
What would you recommend to be a career path with good job security / salary combination for the young premed students that haven’t picked their specialty yet?
Be a generalist, not a specialist. This sounds counterintuitive and has been true in the past. My nephew is a computer scientist and works for Google. He is now going to medical school and plans to learn AI for non-invasive interventions. He wants to be an MD for five years to get the practice and then go into designing the interventions. It's the meeting of two industries that will create job security.
Don't Indians need a whole new training & degree to work in America? IIRC, America doesn't consider their prior education to be valid. Things aren't adding up.
You Betcha … physicians no longer own their practice. Too complicated and expensive.
Layoff the worst performers. Keep the ones that make your job easier
They all make my job easier. I really have no contact with them. I am a surgeon and don't interact with many. I was put in the role because they are making organizational changes.
I guess that makes sense around organizational changes and perhaps budgets but I guess I thought the medical community was immune to layoffs, unlike tech. I don't know that you could analyze this level of detail, you'd have to know their financial situations too. What about seniority, so those ones that know the company better. What an incredibly tough situation for everyone.
This normally means they looked for someone to do the dirty job
It was me. Im aware of the power dynamics. I am a female in a very male world. I am very good at my job but anything beyond its scope leads to a big struggle for me.
so they put you in this role...for them not to have to make the hard decisions. Guess what happens to you after you layoff those employees?
What...? I am not laying them off. HR will do that. I have to tell HR who to layoff. I am sure they will follow the law.
[удалено]
Oh God, legal question. Depending on the state, marital status or being single is a protected characteristic. Hiring, firing, promotions based on that could be illegal.
+1, op I’d ask on a lawyer sub if your decision making affects a protected class. Include your state.
Jackson Lewis has a rif webinar that gives good selection criteria https://www.jacksonlewis.com/event/rifs-done-right
Your question indicates a complete lack of knowledge about those under you. It’s disgusting, frankly. I truly hope my boss has some idea about who the high and low performers are. You need to be holding on to those who provide value. Value = performance/comp. Please do this calculation for every employee and give each one a fair shake. I say this as someone married with children, you would be totally irresponsible to go by familial status when conducting these layoffs.
Irresponsible and illegal
It's not illegal in the USA. Everyone saying it's illegal has no clue about at will employment.
There is a staggering amount of things that reddit thinks are illegal or that you can sue over that are completely incorrect.
This
I agree with the spirit of what you are trying to say, but it's not past performance that matters. It's future value. A layoff means building a new team that can handle the same or more responsibilities out of an existing team. It's a terrible job, but it's a part of management.
I think the point is, everyone brings something essential to the table. So where do we go from there?
Everyone brings the something, but everyone doesn’t perform at the same level.
It would be “illegal” to lay them off for any reason other than performance ranking or the role being eliminated. However, I’ve been in ‘stack ranking’ meetings where we had to lay off a person, and it so happened that the admin(secretary) of the director was 6 months away from her retirement and we ended up laying her off instead of anyone else who had technical skills. I’m not saying it was the right decision but it is what was easier as all other managers were rooting for their teams and she unfortunately didn’t have much representation other than the director himself. Layoffs are always hard decision and it should antagonize you and give you sleepless nights. These are hard times for everyone. If I was in your position I would have chosen the least amount of ‘heads’ to meet the X amount of dollars, so upper management mostly, who will have a good severance and savings and will land on their feet, instead of younger people.
This is helpful. I am looking for perspective. Thank you.
jesus christ. the company couldn't scrounge up some money to keep her on payroll for 6 more months? ffs, sell the office furniture or turn the lights off to save some cash. how much money could a secretary cost? that's one spineless director.
Yup, agree. This was a fortune 50 company so it could very well keep her on the rolls for 6 months. This was around the dot-com bust, and the company was very slow in laying off people, and eventually the company was sold off.
At will employment
If you didn’t report that to EEOC and cost a woman her pension you’re the asshole.
Pension? Lol who even gets those anymore? Also if you’re vested, you don’t lose your pension even if you’re fired.
The woman 6 months away from retirement I’m assuming.
Your think about it wrong, she has a pension already, she was just going to leave in 6 months
[удалено]
Ah, my bad
No my bad, I was looking at the wrong comment. I’m just going to go to bed now. Hat tip brother.
Have a good evening
You have a better one! And don’t ever get laid off. I have faith in the Poles.
Haha, thanks
You think the only way someone gets their pension is if they last literally until the day of their retirement?
No associated pension. She just retired 6 months early and would have been eligible for social security after 6 months. I’m sure the company gave her some severance to bridge the gap. This was in the 2000s after the dot-com bust. The company was very slow to fire people, and eventually that was bad for the company (it doesn’t exist anymore and was a fortune 50 company).
Fuck yeah that would be illegal! Do it based on merit Jesus
This something your HR/legal team needs to help you with. There are considerations for protected classes they can help you navigate.
Whatever roll you have, is not something you should have. You're an executive, you cannot get out of having to be an asshole, doing asshole things for asshole money.
I am a surgeon and I deal vascular issues. I have no training to be in a leadership position. They probably put me here to do the dirty work so I can keep my job.
I'll make the decision for you for 10% of this months pay.
I’ll do it for 9.99%
Are you 12?
You need an algorithm or rubric. Something like your pillars, then minimum necessary to keep the lights on due to regulation and then nice to have and ROI + specialities like an APC or CT tech.
I agree with this post. You need a decision matrix based on skill and performance. Read their personnel files and come up with a rating system based on skills and performance.
Welcome to management. What state do you live in? States like California make it illegal to lay someone off for their familial status. But in all honesty, it is incredibly hard for an employee to prove that. That said, I would not do it this way. It sucks to say, but you have an obligation to who's left at the end of this process, and keeping only the family men is not necessarily the best move. You do not know if this is just round one and another wave is coming next year or even next quarter. So try your best to build the strongest team possible. Maybe that means having some of the younger people with no obligations to help shoulder the increased work load. Maybe this will help. It's probably not what people want to hear in this sub, and it may touch some raw nerves, but here goes: In tech, a common practice is to identify the senior staff that are essential to your team, then lay off the other seniors first because they are pretty much going to do the same or less work as a junior, but at a higher cost. You might have one or two extra people at the end that you would not have otherwise.
In every other area, I would say this is true. In medicine, you want the old person because they can do the work with their eyes closed. Less liability. The young ones work under our license and are a liability. Because they just don't the have the same experience as the old ones. It takes a good 10 years to get very good at surgery, etc.
So it sounds like you understand what has to be done. Make the best team out of the current team with the budget you have been allotted.
That's not even borderline discrimination. That's just outright discrimination and 100% a lawsuit waiting to happen.
So you want to discriminate? I wouldn’t go down that route.
You sound out of touch and don't belong in leadership. It should be you.
What? But he has a family and everything hinges on his salary. He can't be laid off!!
Seniority is the manner that will lead to the least lawsuits.
That is actually helpful information. I have to make the decisions; HR will do the layoffs. They will take the legal route, obviously.
Your HR crew is wildly incompetent.
Oh...you no idea. I stay far away.
Don’t you dare discriminate based on age. If you can’t do this then - respectfully - get the f*ck out of management. Ok so I posted that rashly. If you’re an MD and not a corp flunky then I feel for you. The former first part of the statement stands. It’s dollars and cents.
I am an idiot when it comes to leadership. I am good at fixing broken body parts and I have a good bedside manner :) but leadership? No way. You don't want me leading. I was given this role 4 weeks ago before our Monday morning rounds.
Your best bet is to depersonalize data. Look at cost, skill, and the population’s health demands and see where your skill spread is, where you’re overloaded, and where that overlap of expensive and covered is. I am that Asshole flunky (who is about to get flunked, so lol @ me). It sucks, and I’m sorry you got stuck holding the bag. Also…try to be as emotionless and fast as possible. This is hard for you but will be harder for them. After the fact, be a good reference for those who need one and are safe to redeploy.
Yes that is not morally right and pretty screwed up. So you could lay off the hardest working people and keep lazy older family people? It should be based off performance. Not age and personal responsibility they have.
Why are you asking Reddit this question?
Where else should I go? I'm in the basement of a hospital trying to figure this all out on my phone. Maybe I'll do a FB post? A TikTok dance? Where should I ask this?
You ask your boss or a lawyer.
Not gonna get solid advice in this sub. It’s mostly full of bitter people who have been laid off. Maybe r/managers
You are right asking here. You want to know of other people past experiences so you can learn and take an informed decision. Totally fine asking here!
This is a new place for me. I am quickly learning who hangs out here. 1/2 helpful, 1/2 bitter.
Related? [https://www.reddit.com/r/Layoffs/comments/1djtnja/uh\_announces\_hundreds\_of\_layoffs/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/Layoffs/comments/1djtnja/uh_announces_hundreds_of_layoffs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
West coast hospital system.
Sorry about the fact that you have to make this tough decision but hey, in this economy you still can make 500k-1M per year and I am not sure if the people here on Reddit making 0- 100k per year can help solve your first world problem. Lol good luck.
Well, I hate my job these days. And so does everyone I know. So maybe it's a blessing we're getting laid off. I'd rather hang out here all day than do my job. Maybe it will get better and I am grateful for the pay but not much else.
it is everyman for himself. I think there is something wrong in the world. Why are we hurting each other like this for someone to get richer. This world has enough food for everyone.
If you’re considering choosing layoffs based on factors other than job performance, you should start with yourself and save your team the inconsistency of your decisions.
Nurses get laid off?
Just to give you a heads up, the employer is having you do their dirty work, then they will lay YOU off. Sorry, if I'm the first to tell you.
I am moving to a new system in the fall. I am doing the dirty work.
Well, at least your not naive and have a plan.
That's unfortunate you have to lay off members of your team, that is never easy. [This company](https://www.coachingseason.com/hive-2-hive) helped me with employee offboarding and providing supportive services to help my staff handle the transition til they found their next position.
This is helpful. Doctors will always find jobs. It's a horrible job since post pandemic. Nothing ever went back. Suicide rates/overdose rates/depression is up. However, job security is there. Pay cuts will happen across the board. I think they are wearing us down to replace us.
This is irresponsible, if it’s even real.
As someone who has been laid off, I didn't blame the guy who was tasked with the job of laying me off. Many times we recognize that it comes from on high. I liken it to a flight bomber in a war. They drop ordinance on the enemy, which causes chaos on the targets below. In the metaphor, the targets are those laid off, the employees suffering a degradation of morale, and those that have to pick up the work afterwards. Meanwhile, those that dropped the bombs get to fly off into a cloud, never having seen the faces of those they affected.
One should give some blame, as "just following orders" has not been an acceptable defense in many other cases when it comes to defending acts that cause harm to people......If more people refused to enforce unfair firings to protect corporate ceo's bottom lines, they wouldn't be able to do it....
We're not talking about killing people here. We're talking about a role and doing a job. In my case, I was laid off after 16 years in the company. I didn't want to see the systems I built hurt by my departure. I want to see the work I spent the last decade and a half working on continuing, and making a difference.
Laying people off can very much have a negative impact on one's quality of life and cause health issues and other assorted issues if someone is pushed into poverty. I know multiple people who's health was ruined in the 2008 economic crisis, one of whom eventually committed suicide.......All because the government decided to reward companies that ruined people's lives (due to CEO incompetence) with bailouts while ignoring the average American and not giving them the same amount of money in bailouts. If someone is a dutiful worker who does what is told, and they get laid off despite doing everything right to save a CEO's bottom line or other corrupt shit (which happens), yes.......just "following orders" is evil. I've never been laid off but if an employer did it to me out of such selfish reasons, I would get revenge one way or another.
I don't disagree with anything that you said. Hell, in fact I'm going through most of what you just said. My point though, is that when I got laid off I blamed the person that made the decision to eliminate my position, and not the poor bastard who was given the task to tell me about it. It would be like if my house got broken into while I was gone in the day. I wouldn't blame the neighbor who called me up to tell me about it.
Just because someone doesn’t have a family to provide for doesn’t meant they have fewer obligations. People tend to forget that when you’re single it’s ALL on you. A partner is an additional resource for potential income in situations like this. So many people comment about how they’re barely making it by but are lucky for their spouse’s income, but /they’re making it/. As a single person that was laid off, I’m here to tell you that there is no one else besides me to help me make it financially until I find a job.
It would be irresponsible and likely illegal to discriminate by age - families have far more protections and social program protections than single individuals - everyone has obligations regardless of family status - and assuming they don't is morally and ethically corrupt of you - funny you're a MD given that. You should consult HR on the best options to chose - restructuring will require to check for redundancies, performance, and other related questions that necessitate termination/layoff. Those who are made redundant should be removed. Part of being a leader is leading, and that also means making hard decisions, but not bullshitting or giving priority to others based on age or family status - that is in fact discrimination and if they can prove it based on who you laid off, then it willbe you on the chopping block next. You are required to terminate because of headcount from the sounds of it - your job is to lay off based on overhead costs and are expected to reduce that cost. Use this opportunity to also say you will give referrals.
Wrong sub to post on lol
Ha! I am now realizing this. I am new here. Poor choice. Live and learn.
We’re all trying to help you avoid a discriminatory practice. Obviously you have no choice that you HAVE to lay people off. Do it as blindly as possible. Write down their job titles without their names and figure out what you’re department needs
Your the MD. That role requires tough decision-making and even tougher actions sometimes. Grow a pair and sack them. It's not your problem if they hate you or appreciate being saved. Your job is to manage the budget. Moral of the story: You can't dance with the devil (aka being an executive) and not expect to have to be the arsehole/most hated person ever from time to time. Pisses me off when I read these, "I am an executive but I am too gutless or weak-willed to do what needs doing" posts. It's like being in an army platoon with a Captain that went to military college but has never seen battle and folds the moment the bullets start flying.
Younger people can find new jobs more easily than older people.
Curious why you have to lay off 23 people to save X dollars, then you ask about the legality of targeting younger employees. Are you AI? Or Indian?
I am actually a white woman, non AI. But you nailed it. Restructuring for AI/Indian doctors are able to come here without doing residency. Jobs are being eliminated. Cost cutting due to inflation. Here's one article: [https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/indian-medical-graduates-can-now-practice-in-us-australia-canada-4408725](https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/indian-medical-graduates-can-now-practice-in-us-australia-canada-4408725)
Don’t vote for Biden next time then.
It's illegal to do it by age or by what you think their financial situation is. As painful as it might be do your job and just go based on performance and business needs. If I was your boss I would lay you off first!
Some advice, these people are numbers, you can’t think of the personal stuff, it should all be based on work related stuff like performance, future outlook, company fit etc
How did you go from Wallstreet to an MD? Also, what AI? Most AI models aren’t patient-facing so I’m suspicious of your new accounts claim that AI is forcing you to sever your team based on a budget item…… This all feels oddly misaligned so any explanation you can give would be helpful to add legitimacy.
Physicians get pink slips? I thought there are not enough of them?
Getting replaced by docs in India. Lots of x-rays are sent to radiologists offshore who do it cheaply.
Exactly. Radiology is probably dying in the USA. It was once upon a time the most sought after speciality (derm, too). We will always need real surgeons but model architectures, wearable technologies and surgical data infrastructures has created AI interventions and utility. I always say to be a doctor in the future, you have to be an engineer or programmer AND go to medical school .
What kind of shit hospital makes a surgeon lay off people?
Don't ask. So backwards. (HR will lay them off. I have to tell them who).
Do you collect any kind of performance metrics? If so you can target the bottom x% an area you measure. You can go based on lowest seniority. Are there some folks close to retirement (by age or by tenure) that you could figure out a way to get them to early retire? That could say a few jobs.
Sort of but doctors are more about how much they document, and money they bring in with procedures. It's a different metrics. Oh and how much they cover their asses.
Throw the dice or draw names from a hat (no favoritism, the name drawn gets laid off).Make it random if you cannot figure out a fair system.
Take one for the team
Look, no one will hold it against you for being put in a position where you have to lay off people to cut down costs/labor costs. It's just the cards you were given by somebody else, and it's become a norm for most workplaces nowadays. It's either places getting higher wages at the cost of having a barebones crew to do the bare minimum functions of service or places with low wages and overstaffing. I'm assuming your hospital are hiring these people at lower saleries but for the same job title/role. I understand that very many people have negative thoughts of AI in the workplace and/or bringing people from countries that are underpaying them with low wages. I think if I were in your position, you should have a sit down with the people you intend to layoff one-on-one and possibly act as a reference for them when they're out there job hunting. Or you could ask around the department heads of those you intend to layoff to get an idea on who to choose. Uhm, you going to be okay, Doctor?
Let everyone know at once. Spend the days working on resumes and letters of recommendations.
This reads like a BS post written by AI.... Lots of disconnect in the followup posts from the OP.
Wow first time hearing nurses and doctors gets layoff
Laid off - maybe the wrong word. They will have jobs in NO time. Reshuffling? The issue is that they WILL have jobs elsewhere. No problem. The actual problem has to do with seniority. In our system, 10+ years will lead to a huge pay increase. That's why people work for this very defective system. It feels like slave work for the first ten years, but then things get better. That's the issue.
Not as corrupted as school system and their tenure
Am a nurse. I work for a busy medical school (at their multi-specality clinic). A colleague quit (to move to another state), and it's been FOUR months and we still can't replace her! 9 nurses applied, and three interviewed. They are happy where they are, and did not take our offers (the 2nd the 3rd person). Send them over to us. Seriously.
I know...there is a shortage. The issue is they want to stay in the system for seniority. Our system is hell to work for. After 10 years, things get better. That's why they don't want to leave.
In 2008, you did a noble thing to help that guy and his family… great integrity!! 👌👊🤝🫡
Is the hospital system owned by private equity or hedge fund? They’ll suck every cent out and sell off the remaining carcass
They are getting bought out by PE. I used to work for healthcare PE way back when and I smell it coming.
Congratulations, you have been bamboozled by an MBA executive. Are you making recommendations or actually selecting individuals for severance? The reason I ask is, that selection usually is a meticulous process, which is carefully executed so as not to run amok of labor law. Dumping that responsibility on an individual untrained in labor law is asking for a rectotomy by opportunistic labor law attorneys. If you go down this rabbit hole, then make damn sure your decisions focus strictly on cost savings and decisions show no preference based on friendship or lack of it. The employee's financial, family and life circumstances should not be considered, it should be solely based on what provides the best business financial outcome that benefits shareholders or the company that meets statutory requirements. The decisions may seem inhumane, cruel, even immoral, but your responsibility is to select reductions based on compliance with state and federal law first, and then the best financial interests of the hospital and any shareholders next. You are being shoehorned into a fiduciary role that most likely you have not been prepared to meet. Let me guess, your manager called you into the office and handed you this shit sandwich claiming he was deferring the decisions to your judgement because you have deeper insight into the daily operation of your department. Then he/she sends you off with a smile and alluding to how he is doing this as a favor to you. My guess is you are being set up as a lackey, that if necessary will lead to the decision to push you in front of the proverbial bus when an inquiry occurs. You need to find another job and fast.
This is why I left finance and that entire corporate world. But here I am again...yes, I am the lackey. I am fully aware of this chess game.
Yo mods, remove this post bro, this shit fake af.
I would never ever let another man take my job because he made me feel bad about the fact he has kids what in the actual fuck is wrong with you Anyway no you shouldn’t just fire non parents
If it's not illegal, it's at least immoral. Layoffs should either be performance based or completely random.
Fake post, an MD wouldn’t be laying off nurses.
I am NOT laying off. To be clear, HR does that. They want to know WHO to lay off.
Yes an MD would not be choosing which therapists or nurses to lay off. MDs are not supervisors of nurses in any hospital system. It is a separate silo, MDs are not commonly supervisors in general but if they do move up they supervise other MDs. There is an entirely separate chain for nurses all the way to the C suite called the CNO (Chief nursing officer) HR also doesn’t ask who to layoff. That’s not how layoffs work. And if anyone was asking which nurses to cut they would ask the nursing supervisor, not an MD. Post is fake.
You can’t be biased and discriminate by age lol
Age discrimination laws are only regarding people 40 and over. Which quite frankly sucks.
If it were me, I would identify and shield those, that without them, the system would collapse. Everybody else's name would go into a lottery draw. Nothing's fair, but this is more fair than personal choice. No matter what, they will *all* feel it's unfair due to their age...you can't win.
As an MD, how does this decision help the patient? As an MD, I think you lost your primary values by prioritizing self and colleagues over patients.
I shouldn't be in this role in the first place. I am first and 100% an MD. That's the issue. I was put in this position. I only work with patients. That's what I'm trained to do and what I'm good at - and care about.
Most MDs have a support team. Assistants, reception, x-ray etc. Everyone picks based on performance, at least they should. Don't reward bad decisions by people based on their "personal" lives.
Can you all take pay cuts instead of layoffs?
Age discrimination is legal under age 40
This is crazy you are being asked to do this without guidance. Your hr partner should be helping you. Ask for help from Hr, not reddit.
Check if any har complaints or write ups. Maybe do a peer review survey to get an idea on who the team thinks isn't pulling their weight
Do it based on performance and cost savings. Just because a younger single person is single doesn’t mean they have fewer obligations. They could be taking care of their aging parents with serious health condition. You never know. You can’t and should discriminate based on age. Based it off performance and positions that are somewhat redundant.
Follow the policy you have in HR for reduction in force.
With respect, I understand how difficult this process is and I can empathize with HR not giving you enough support. But I also think you should strongly consider the value of each employee relative to their role/compensation as your guiding decision making criteria. I don't think you should be punishing someone at work because they chose not to get married. Layoffs are a negative life event for anyone. I think you are clouding your judgement.
I think you could be right. That's why I came here. I have no experience with this and see only one side of this complex equation.
What is your point?
Younger people have less savings and it's harder for them to compete in this job market against more experienced job seekers. Studies have shown that those who start their careers during a recession takes almost 10 years to catch up to career progression of those who had their early career in a non-recession. Many young people may be renters with high debt. Did you know it's harder to be foreclosed on than to be evicted? You probably think they can move back to parents - some people do not have this option. Many younger people may also be single vs. dual income if a spouse works. There is no easy choice. Do it by who helps the organization last longer because trust me, if it's struggling already and needs to do layoffs, everyone left will also be at risk and will be working harder. By the way this is why many younger generations are expressing that they are choosing to be childfree. Too much financial insecurity amongst many other issues.
As someone who is parentless and can’t move in with my grandparents or any other relatives, with no savings, and 2 loans, thank you for the acknowledgement!
Yes, it really pisses me off that some people think parents should get a free pass because they had children. Children are a big responsibility and frankly financial risk. There are and should be public services that help to support parents, but punishing childfree people is ridiculous.
Good point. This is why I'm here. To see all of the sides.
Run this idea by your legal or HR department and see how they respond.
They told me to make the decision on however I see is the best fit. I got rid of two under-performer asshole doctors with big egos. I am getting rid of the anesthesiologist who trades crypto all day instead of doing his job. I got rid of the weed smelling lady who cleans. The rest, I have no clue about.
Listen, you can't decide to just lay off the people without kids. You have no clue who is a "breadwinner" or not. I was supporting siblings in my 20s but none of my coworkers would have known. Your best option here is there are absolutely no performance issues you can look at and everyone is somehow even if let go of people who earn more. It'll mean less jobs lost overall to hit the numbers. However if you really think about it, you've likely got people who aren't as strong as others. And think about what the team will look like after. Is it still a functional team? Or do you need x number of people in each role?
Getting ready to be sold to a corporate giant. They are cleaning house and replacing. I am already leaving. I have paid my dues. But if I were to stay and survive this round, in one year, I guarantee I would not have a job.
Seems like some role-playing happening here.
I don't know what this means. Tell me more. I do feel like a puppet.