Hi Coco! Thanks for your thoughts. Unfortunately, it is a small company, under 100 people. HR is three people and as often is the case, they seem to just want to cover the company's butt.

I haven't seen any indication that the high turnover in my team is of concern to upper management. I've been here about a year and a half and the typical department staffing level should be about 8 people. In my time, 11 people have been fired or have quit!! I guess they just see it as the cost of doing business, although I find it terrible for morale and productivity since we never have a situation where everyone is fully trained. Also, new people tend to make more mistakes, which the rest of us have to spend time fixing.


Here, if a company wants to let someone go, they usually cite needs of the business and pay severance based on the time the person has worked there. This avoids wrongful dismissal lawsuits. Our boss has been there 11 years and obviously makes more than us, so they'd have to pay her a lot. I guess they figure it is more cost-effective to make smaller severance payments to people with less seniority. However, the money adds up and there are costs associated with constantly hiring and training new people, so, in the long run it seems like a bad idea.


I asked her what is going to happen with calculation of monthly statistics due to the editing problems last month. She said the same thing as the editor - if it didn't get edited it doesn't count, although she said the problems "would be taken into consideration". That is pretty vague and does not put me at ease. It sounds like she has a lot of leeway of how to interpret our numbers and still could give us a hard time. She hasn't addressed the issue with any comment to the group at large, which I think is very poor leadership.