I should have added this at first but I'm not saying this policy is bad, I'm not even against layoffs in all cases. Sometimes you hire a lot, sometimes you cut, that's business. This policy does seem better than direct layoffs.
I was just commenting on the turn of phrase, not laying people off but 'terminating their positions and making them look for a new job' (which sounds pretty dang near being laid off with garden leave).
The term "layoffs" is obviously toxic, so companies go to lengths to avoid using that particular phrase, even when that's what seems to be happening. I've been at a company while this happened: lots of reductions in headcount over a short period but "we're not doing layoffs."
I was just commenting on the turn of phrase, not laying people off but 'terminating their positions and making them look for a new job' (which sounds pretty dang near being laid off with garden leave).
The term "layoffs" is obviously toxic, so companies go to lengths to avoid using that particular phrase, even when that's what seems to be happening. I've been at a company while this happened: lots of reductions in headcount over a short period but "we're not doing layoffs."