WGU Layoffs

[ss20ts]

Make the decision, or make the decision and actually execute the layoffs? How do you even run the specifics by legal within 3 hours?

Lots of companies don't run layoffs by legal. They just pay the fine or file bankruptcy. They don't care.

[jsd]

I don't think this particular point about layoff timeframes, a minor part of my overall post, is being argued in good faith and is bordering on absurdity now, so I'll drop it as it. It doesn't change the overall statement I was making.

[dfrecore]

[quote pid='341091' dateline='1625801669']
A rash decision of this scale, for a company of this scale, from start to execution, would still be no where close to 3 days. 3 days is simply not a reasonable claim.

Regardless, even if I conceded this impossible 3 day timeframe, my overall point stands. Much ado about nothing.

I've seen a fortune 500 make the decision to lay off over 1500 people in less than 3 hours before from start to finish, after an analysis my company provided for them. No notice, no preparations, etc. Entire departments cut, the fortune 500 barely read the report and went with our recommendations the moment they found out about it.

ooof.
[/quote]

So this was not a decision made on the basis of your analysis - the decision was already made, and your analysis gave them cover. They had that layoff ready to go before they ever even talked to your company.  The ENTIRE reason they hired you in the first place was to reinforce a decision they had already made long before your company came into the picture.  And if your company's analysis didn't say what they wanted, they would bring in another company to do another analysis.

[JusticeNamaste]

Hello to All,

Firstly, let me begin by assuring everyone that I am NOT a troll although I did enjoy the movie

Everything that I have written is true, according to my former course instructor.  How much of what this person said is true, I do not know and I would hazard to caution: nor does anyone.  People do and say things all the time - does it make true/valid? Maybe. Sometimes.

And maybe not.

Here is what I DO know (and this information is readily available to anyone with an inclination to research).  The current president of the university is a former VP at Amazon.  Why is this important? Because, first and foremost, a university chose to hire someone who has no understanding of higher education - what IS understood is business.  Is this necessarily a "bad" thing? Well - again, Amazon is unfortunately rather notorious for NOT treating its employees well at all; and most recently, an attempt to unionize by Amazon workers was quashed  - how is this germane to this particular thread? Hmm -  maybe connect the dots - meaning, quite simply this:

When a university president is hired from a company that has a very negative reputation for how it treats the employees who work for said company, one can see why WGU is very much on the precipice of becoming a "diploma mill" and so the callous disregard for how it treats their employees becomes much easier to understand.  It's been interesting to me in reading all these comments that no one seems to suggest something that could have actually negated the bad publicity from what occurred with the recent layoffs.

It's quite simple and if WGU had wise counsel and a good PR person they might have suggested this instead: have the upper senior level management volunteer to take pay cuts so the layoffs do not have to happen.  As another poster made mention of, if there is no physical campus that students must attend then why the million dollar plus salary for those such as Mr. Pulsipher and the others?

"Follow the money" as they say.

I also wonder how many posters on here are aware that a few years ago WGU was audited by the Office of the Inspector General:

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019...gs-western

I still believe with my whole heart, that at its core, this school is a scam.  It's just dressed up rather nicely, that's all.  If other students are helped in their professional careers by WGU, then that is wonderful (for them); however, that does not mean that WGU is not a diploma mill.  They are a bloated institution that basically is running a con and so far, it's working.

https://www.bbb.org/us/ut/salt-lake-city...66-4001017


Just to redress the notion that I am somehow a "troll" here are both positive and negative reviews by students, for WGU:

https://www.gradreports.com/colleges/wes...university

Bottom Line: it's a choice, like everything else in life.  Make of it what you will.  Beware though: "A wolf in sheep's clothing"

[jsd]

WGU is very much on the precipice of becoming a "diploma mill"

that does not mean that WGU is not a diploma mill

I don't think you have an understanding of what this term means. WGU's accreditation by definition means it is not a diploma mill.
https://www2.ed.gov/students/prep/colleg...mills.html

I also wonder how many posters on here are aware that a few years ago WGU was audited by the Office of the Inspector General:

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019...gs-western

And as the article states, the findings were rejected and WGU was determined to be operating appropriately. The institution has bipartisan support and has been praised by the Trump and Obama administrations.


We can certainly have a conversation regarding if it's a good idea to hire those with no experience to lead a company (I agree, it's not in 99% of situations), or if execs should take a paycut before resorting to layoffs (in many situations I'd agree, but in this case it wasn't a cash flow issue, it was a workforce bloat issue). But there's no valid argument to be made that this school is in any way illegitimate or a diploma mill. You're wrong by definition, regardless of how much you dislike the way the school operates.

It's perfectly reasonable for you and anyone else to not like a school and not want to attend it if you disagree with their business practices; your opinion is just as valid as anyone else's --- but your accusations are not.

[rachel83az]

I would definitely stray away from saying that WGU is a diploma mill. That means some very specific things and I don't think any of that criteria is met by WGU. Do they have some distasteful policies? Absolutely. But that doesn't make them a diploma mill.

[GizmoJack]

I would definitely stray away from saying that WGU is a diploma mill. That means some very specific things and I don't think any of that criteria is met by WGU. Do they have some distasteful policies? Absolutely. But that doesn't make them a diploma mill.

Can you give some examples of "distasteful policies"?

[JusticeNamaste]

WGU is very much on the precipice of becoming a "diploma mill"

that does not mean that WGU is not a diploma mill

I don't think you have an understanding of what this term means. WGU's accreditation by definition means it is not a diploma mill.
https://www2.ed.gov/students/prep/colleg...mills.html

I also wonder how many posters on here are aware that a few years ago WGU was audited by the Office of the Inspector General:

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019...gs-western

And as the article states, the findings were rejected and WGU was determined to be operating appropriately. The institution has bipartisan support and has been praised by the Trump and Obama administrations.


We can certainly have a conversation regarding if it's a good idea to hire those with no experience to lead a company (I agree, it's not in 99% of situations), or if execs should take a paycut before resorting to layoffs (in many situations I'd agree, but in this case it wasn't a cash flow issue, it was a workforce bloat issue). But there's no valid argument to be made that this school is in any illegitimate or a diploma mill. You're wrong by definition, regardless of how much you dislike the way the school operates.

It's perfectly reasonable for you and anyone else to not like a school and not want to attend it if you disagree with their business practices; your opinion is just as valid as anyone else's --- but your accusations are not.

"A tisket, a tasket" - thank you for your valid comments also but with all due respect, I disagree.

Universities (and let's be honest, that name alone inspires belief and/or recognition); can have accreditation, but there are varying levels of this - ie., DeVry University, University of Phoenix).  The thing is, accreditation can be thus giveth and thus taketh away, natch.

What makes an institution of higher learning a diploma mill? You ask this question to ten different people, you will receive ten different answers.  As I said, if WGU helps even a portion of its students to better their lives, then that is wonderful; however, as an individual with a moral and ethical compass that helps to guide me through life, I would prefer to invest and support organizations that treat their employees well - this is a personal decision, of course, and individual free will.  However, as a former university professor myself, who returned to school (WGU) to obtain a third graduate degree, I can personally attest that layoffs and merging of departments at institutions of higher learning, do not bode well for the future of an institution.  This is a harbinger of change(s) that will be occurring.

[dfrecore]

Hello to All,

Firstly, let me begin by assuring everyone that I am NOT a troll although I did enjoy the movie

Everything that I have written is true, according to my former course instructor.  How much of what this person said is true, I do not know and I would hazard to caution: nor does anyone.  People do and say things all the time - does it make true/valid? Maybe. Sometimes.

And maybe not.

Here is what I DO know (and this information is readily available to anyone with an inclination to research).  The current president of the university is a former VP at Amazon.  Why is this important? Because, first and foremost, a university chose to hire someone who has no understanding of higher education - what IS understood is business.  Is this necessarily a "bad" thing? Well - again, Amazon is unfortunately rather notorious for NOT treating its employees well at all; and most recently, an attempt to unionize by Amazon workers was quashed  - how is this germane to this particular thread? Hmm -  maybe connect the dots - meaning, quite simply this:

When a university president is hired from a company that has a very negative reputation for how it treats the employees who work for said company, one can see why WGU is very much on the precipice of becoming a "diploma mill" and so the callous disregard for how it treats their employees becomes much easier to understand.  It's been interesting to me in reading all these comments that no one seems to suggest something that could have actually negated the bad publicity from what occurred with the recent layoffs.

It's quite simple and if WGU had wise counsel and a good PR person they might have suggested this instead: have the upper senior level management volunteer to take pay cuts so the layoffs do not have to happen.  As another poster made mention of, if there is no physical campus that students must attend then why the million dollar plus salary for those such as Mr. Pulsipher and the others?

"Follow the money" as they say.

I also wonder how many posters on here are aware that a few years ago WGU was audited by the Office of the Inspector General:

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019...gs-western

I still believe with my whole heart, that at its core, this school is a scam.  It's just dressed up rather nicely, that's all.  If other students are helped in their professional careers by WGU, then that is wonderful (for them); however, that does not mean that WGU is not a diploma mill.  They are a bloated institution that basically is running a con and so far, it's working.

https://www.bbb.org/us/ut/salt-lake-city...66-4001017


Just to redress the notion that I am somehow a "troll" here are both positive and negative reviews by students, for WGU:

https://www.gradreports.com/colleges/wes...university

Bottom Line: it's a choice, like everything else in life.  Make of it what you will.  Beware though: "A wolf in sheep's clothing"

There are like 20 customer reviews on BBB, and WGU doesn't even belong to that company, so I wonder if there's even a way to dispute the complaints?  This is just silly.

I'm also willing to bet that the vast majority of students who complain about WGU do so because of the competency-based model rather than quality.  Just a guess, but while I do understand that this is not for everyone, I'm sure there are plenty of students who just aren't ready for the difficulty, don't have an ability to self-teach that is required, and aren't moving quickly enough through courses to make this a feasible program for them.  Instead of just realizing this and stopping, they complain.  I get it.  But I don't necessarily think all of the complaints are valid.

Your understanding of how business works is a bit...lacking I think.  Colleges ARE businesses.  They need to make money, even if they are non-profits - it a business doesn't make money, then it's either a hobby or will no longer exist.  And the sooner a businessperson with some business sense is put in charge of a business, no matter the type, the better.  If more colleges were run as businesses, they might be doing better.  How much someone gets paid in a business is usually dependent upon the market - so if the head guy makes millions, it's probably because they think he's worth it, and because that's what the market requires.  I'm sure if they could have found someone cheaper, they may have hired that person instead.

And just so you know, most senior-level leadership have contracts - so you can't take the money from them.  But even if you could, or even if they volunteered, that is RARELY a good plan - because it's not enough money overall to bail out the company of their problem.  A few people at the top just don't make enough for that.  If you look long-term at the numbers, having a few (10?) VP's give up some money isn't going to make up for 160 employees making 80k a year plus benefits.  It just doesn't add up.


I think WGU just handled this incredibly poorly, and need to fix their problems before they have a mutiny on their hands (both from employees and students leaving in droves).

[jsd]

but there are varying levels

The US Dept of Ed used to distinguish between these levels, regional vs national. Regional was the gold standard, and that is what WGU has. In practice regional is still seen as th higher standard, but the US DoE no longer even recognizes the distinction so the point is moot.

The thing is, accreditation can be thus giveth and thus taketh away, natch.

And WGU is not under any threat of their accreditation being revoked, and in fact was renewed in 2019.

What makes an institution of higher learning a diploma mill?

The regulatory standard/definition of the US Dept of Education, which I linked you to. I encourage you to read it.

You ask this question to ten different people, you will receive ten different answers. 

Then I would also encourage those 10 people to read the established definition so they are no longer confused. There is no argument here. The meaning is legally defined by legislation.

As I said, if WGU helps even a portion of its students to better their lives, then that is wonderful; however, as an individual with a moral and ethical compass that helps to guide me through life, I would prefer to invest and support organizations that treat their employees well - this is a personal decision, of course, and individual free will. 

Again, you won't find me (or many other people) arguing that you can't have this opinion or make your own personal choices based on it. But don't misrepresent the facts to justify your opinion. Rather, your opinion should be informed by the facts.

However, as a former university professor myself, who returned to school (WGU) to obtain a third graduate degree, I can personally attest that layoffs and merging of departments at institutions of higher learning, do not bode well for the future of an institution.  This is a harbinger of change(s) that will be occurring.

Public schools and private schools, profit and non-profit routinely go through layoffs cycles. Particularly in the midst of this COVID19 crisis. You want to tell me that Duke University, as a random example, is displaying a harbinger of institutional collapse or other considerable ills (https://abc11.com/duke-university-layoff...d/6874746/ )? Somehow, I doubt it.