> More than half of the employees at the Jersey City facility have decided to move to Linden, New Jersey
Fun fact if you haven't experienced it before. A company will close a facility, and say you can have the same job elsewhere usually requiring drastically different travel time. If you refuse you can't draw unemployment or get any benefits because you turned down the job.
This happened almost 10 yrs ago and I don't anyone who took the deal....I can't imagine anyone would accept such a package, even people who are from India...it was basically just a legal and PR cover, they knew no one was going to take it.
To be fair, it's only 12 miles away. While definitely a pain I don't think it's totally unreasonable especially considering there are almost certainly legitimate operational needs for a larger facility.
In London that's about the same as moving an office from West London to East London (which is happening all the time).
Ah, then that's the PR spin I was trying to be cautious of. It's hard to tell the math from the way they've written it here. What was the former number of employees and what will it be going forward?
That makes sense, and explains why the stock is down. It's actually a nastier form of layoffs. Thanks!
Edit: Actually it looks like it's a net increase in employment. This is insanity.
Fun fact if you haven't experienced it before. A company will close a facility, and say you can have the same job elsewhere usually requiring drastically different travel time. If you refuse you can't draw unemployment or get any benefits because you turned down the job.
It's not all roses.