Lenscrafters outlines “respectful” layoff separation

[Chris Ryser]

Lenscrafters outlines “respectful” layoff separation. The respect starts tomorrow!

Tomorrow might be a good day to call in sick to work. Let the separation continue! Thanks again to a LC insider who sent us this Luxottica timeline for termination. Here are the highlights. Tuesday the 26h, “executive leaders” notify you that your time is done. Wednesday the 27th if they decided to transfer your ***, they will inform you where you are going. Thursday the 28th, if you were tagged as disposable this is your last day. Friday the 29th, reset and look ahead, unless you were fired. Read the actual email highlights below.........................

http://eyeoverheard.wordpress.com/20...row/#more-7439

[Johns]

Not necessarily a sign of anything LC is doing wrong. After all, Sam's just laid off 11,000+, Verizon's dumping thousands of theirs, and many opticals, big and small have shuttered w/out fanfare.

It's never pretty, but what are they supposed to do? A local restaurant chain (Bob's Big Boy) just closed two more locations here by having the mgt. go in at 10:00AM, announce to staff and diners that they were closing. Unlike a steak house that also closed recently, the diners were allowed to finish their meals.

[For-Life]

I can't believe they got Vince McMahon to deliver the message

[optical24/7]

Should have been Donald Trump...

[Spexvet]

...
It's never pretty, but what are they supposed to do? ...

Maybe Leonardo Del Vecchio, the third richest man in Italy, could have lined his pockets with a little less cabbage until the economy recovers. Instead, he makes the economic situation worse by increasing unemployment. Who pays for that? The rest of us grunts.

[fvc2020]

Hey

On the flip side I am looking to increase my staff:-) I hope their loss could be my gain....








Christina

[Johns]

Maybe Leonardo Del Vecchio, the third richest man in Italy, could have lined his pockets with a little less cabbage until the economy recovers. Instead, he makes the economic situation worse by increasing unemployment. Who pays for that? The rest of us grunts.

Spoken like a true...

Yeah, he's supposed to keep paying his employees while his stores are losing money...out of the goodness of his heart...to lessen the impact of "the economic situation".

Actually, he's been doing that for quite awhile already.:D Which is surprising, given the fact that I'm sure the employees offered to take a cut in pay, a reduction in benefits, and whatever they could do to help.

Who pays for that? For what?

What you haven't figured out yet is that the purpose of someone starting a company is to make a profit. It is his family that took the risk, sacrificed, and made the company what it is today. The employees were hired, and compensated for the work they've done. So you think he should just keep paying everyone until the entire company is broke. Hey, it makes sense to you I guess...but not anyone that knows business.

[kcount]

Spoken like a true...

Yeah, he's supposed to keep paying his employees while his stores are losing money...out of the goodness of his heart...to lessen the impact of "the economic situation".

Actually, he's been doing that for quite awhile already.:D Which is surprising, given the fact that I'm sure the employees offered to take a cut in pay, a reduction in benefits, and whatever they could do to help.

Who pays for that? For what?

What you haven't figured out yet is that the purpose of someone starting a company is to make a profit. It is his family that took the risk, sacrificed, and made the company what it is today. The employees were hired, and compensated for the work they've done. So you think he should just keep paying everyone until the entire company is broke. Hey, it makes sense to you I guess...but not anyone that knows business.

Cudos to Johns, Employee's go before my kid doesn't eat.

[Johns]

Hey

On the flip side I am looking to increase my staff:-) I hope their loss could be my gain....



Christina

But don't forget, once you hire them, you are obligated to keep them as employees, even if your business decreases. Or, is that only if your the third richest in Italy. You might be the 4th richest, so the rule wouldn't apply...

(Have to check the rule in Business for Idiots book)

[Chris Ryser]

Just wondering silently...............that nobody has yet tried to cruzify me for bringing up another doom and gloom post.

[Jana Lewis]

Just wondering silently...............that nobody has yet tried to cruzify me for bringing up another doom and gloom post.

It's CRUCIFY Ryser! Get it right! :p

Main Entry: cru·ci·fy
Pronunciation: \ˈkrü-sə-ˌfī\
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): cru·ci·fied; cru·ci·fy·ing
Etymology: Middle English crucifien, from Anglo-French crucifier, from Late Latin crucifigere
Date: 14th century
1 : to put to death by nailing or binding the wrists or hands and feet to a cross
2 : to destroy the power of : mortify <crucify the flesh>
3 a : to treat cruelly : torment b : pillory 2
— cru·ci·fi·er \-ˌfī-ər\ noun



Heh heh... just kidding, just thought I'd CRUCIFY you!!! :cheers:

[Uilleann]

Challenge still stands Chris - and we're all still waiting. Turning blue holding our breath out here in virtual land....

[jediron1]

Spoken like a true...

Yeah, he's supposed to keep paying his employees while his stores are losing money...out of the goodness of his heart...to lessen the impact of "the economic situation".

Actually, he's been doing that for quite awhile already.:D Which is surprising, given the fact that I'm sure the employees offered to take a cut in pay, a reduction in benefits, and whatever they could do to help.

Who pays for that? For what?

What you haven't figured out yet is that the purpose of someone starting a company is to make a profit. It is his family that took the risk, sacrificed, and made the company what it is today. The employees were hired, and compensated for the work they've done. So you think he should just keep
paying everyone until the entire company is broke. Hey, it makes sense to you I guess...but not anyone that knows business.

.


I think you forgot that Dean Butler started that company which he sold to US Shoe which in turn sold it to Lux if I have my history correct. So it wasn't all the third richest person in Italy who did it he just bought in.

[Johns]

.


I think you forgot that Dean Butler started that company which he sold to US Shoe which in turn sold it to Lux if I have my history correct. So it wasn't all the third richest person in Italy who did it he just bought in.

No, I didn't forget that. Dean worked for for Proctor and Gamble in Cincy, Ohio before he started LC, but he sold it back in 1988.

Dean does not own the company now, nor does US shoe, nor does Cole National. The (supposedly) third richest person in Italy now owns Lux. The "poster" was saying that the wealthy gentleman should turn Lux in to a charity for opticians that work for unprofitable companies.

I stand by my first post that Mr. Delvechio worked hard and took risks to be able to be in a position to buy LC adn everything else he owns.

[jediron1]

No, I didn't forget that. Dean worked for for Proctor and Gamble in Cincy, Ohio before he started LC, but he sold it back in 1988.

Dean does not own the company now, nor does US shoe, nor does Cole National. The (supposedly) third richest person in Italy now owns Lux. The "poster" was saying that the wealthy gentleman should turn Lux in to a charity for opticians that work for unprofitable companies.

I stand by my first post that Mr. Delvechio worked hard and took risks to be able to be in a position to buy LC adn everything else he owns.

Johns get grip we are only conversing not trying to have a knock down drag out fight over a silly argument. W0W :hammer:

[Johns]

Johns get grip we are only conversing not trying to have a knock down drag out fight over a silly argument. W0W :hammer:

Sorry...I should have peppered my conversation with a few:p, maybe a:bbg: and a :cheers: or two. I wasn't looking for a fight, or even an argument. I originally said

It's never pretty, but what are they supposed to do?

. Someone from the Just Conversation Forum was lost, wandered in, and tried to turn the thread into a "redistribution of the wealth" thread.

Didn't mean to sound negative, just answering your question.


Here...I've got a few more of these for you::cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers:

[FVCCHRIS]

I like CRUZIFY better. What could be the Webster's definition on that one?

[Spexvet]

... I wasn't looking for a fight, or even an argument. I originally said

It's never pretty, but what are they supposed to do?

.

I wasn't looking for an argument, either. I did not attack you personnally, as you attacked me. I just figured that I would answer your question, since you're not smart enough to know "what are they supposed to do". I'm glad I could educate you.

Someone from the Just Conversation Forum was lost, wandered in,

Negative, nasty, negative. :finger:

and tried to turn the thread into a "redistribution of the wealth" thread.

No, the thread was already a "redistribution of the wealth". It was how 1,100 families will suffer so that the unsopposed third richest man in Italy can continue living his lavish lifestyle.

Didn't mean to sound negative, just answering your question....

You didn't mean to, but you were, and always are.

[Spexvet]

But don't forget, once you hire them, you are obligated to keep them as employees, even if your business decreases. Or, is that only if your the third richest in Italy. You might be the 4th richest, so the rule wouldn't apply...

(Have to check the rule in Business for Idiots book)

WARNING

Do not work for Johns. If it looks like her income is starting to lessen she will fire your butt. Good luck to you and your family.

:p:p:p

[Now I See]

While I agree with many of the points Johns brought up....I can't help but wonder, why they don't start off with cutting the hours back...i.e. close on Sunday?

I'm sure that someone at LC has the bird's eye view, and they have looked over the numbers, but from what I know about the operation, it seems that they have stretched themselves to the limit, 7 days a week, some open till late...why not trim the store hours first?

[Fezz]

While I agree with many of the points Johns brought up....I can't help but wonder, why they don't start off with cutting the hours back...i.e. close on Sunday?

I am no business Dude, but it may be an issue with the lease agreement with the mall owners. I have been involved with several lease agreement *Discussions* that have been a real eye opener! The lease may dictate the days that you must be open (7 days mostly), the hours (mostly all of them), and procedures and punishments for breaking the agreement!

[Now I See]

I am no business Dude, but it may be an issue with the lease agreement with the mall owners. I have been involved with several lease agreement *Discussions* that have been a real eye opener! The lease may dictate the days that you must be open (7 days mostly), the hours (mostly all of them), and procedures and punishments for breaking the agreement!

You know what....I didn't even think about that, Fezz! You're right! Plus if I remember right, they are required to give the mall a portion of their profit (once they go above a certain amount)!

Thanks!

[Spexvet]

While I agree with many of the points Johns brought up.....

Thank you for disagreeing with me .... respectfully.:cheers:

[Strab]

I am no business Dude, but it may be an issue with the lease agreement with the mall owners. I have been involved with several lease agreement *Discussions* that have been a real eye opener! The lease may dictate the days that you must be open (7 days mostly), the hours (mostly all of them), and procedures and punishments for breaking the agreement!

This happened at a Pearle Vision I worked at 12 years ago or so before they were bought out. It was a major issue trying to stay open during those non-peak hours. Now days malls are filing bankruptcy too because they are in financial hardship so I'm sure they are not taking it easy on some of these companies that lease from them.

[Johns]

While I agree with many of the points Johns brought up....I can't help but wonder, why they don't start off with cutting the hours back...i.e. close on Sunday?

They've been cutting hours back for the last 3 years. They could close on Sundays (if they'd be allowed), but they're still paying rent for that day. That's a fixed expense. When the work slows down, you can pay less wages, but not less rent.