I think this is a good idea - mistakes are made in hiring and the status quo is more costly for both sides if someone is not a good fit.
I would extend this to a standing offer to pay someone to quit. I worked at a place that had undergone some changes and a lot of people were not onboard but stayed and slacked off and complained rather than leaving. Better to have a way to drop people like that in mutually agreeable way so those that want to stay can get on with it.
Paying has to be understood to be beyond any statutory obligations. During the initial period there might be few, and "for cause" is always out there, but there are some requirements such as notice period, paid leave.
So this had to mean a "firing bonus" of some kind?
What a silly policy. Who but the most short-sighted possible person would quit after only two weeks on a job? That's not enough time to know if it'll work out and $5,000 is less than the monthly take-home pay for many software engineers.
Wait until six months in, and offer three months' salary. Then you'll see who wants to stay and who doesn't.
Your proposal will reward people who can find a new equivalent job in six months with a temporary 50% raise or fund people for three months to find another job.
[+] [-] version_five|4 years ago|reply
I would extend this to a standing offer to pay someone to quit. I worked at a place that had undergone some changes and a lot of people were not onboard but stayed and slacked off and complained rather than leaving. Better to have a way to drop people like that in mutually agreeable way so those that want to stay can get on with it.
[+] [-] ggm|4 years ago|reply
So this had to mean a "firing bonus" of some kind?
[+] [-] ivraatiems|4 years ago|reply
Wait until six months in, and offer three months' salary. Then you'll see who wants to stay and who doesn't.
[+] [-] wesnerm2|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AtlasBarfed|4 years ago|reply
If TONS of people are quitting a certain team, you know there's problems in that team.