Featured Product
This Week in Quality Digest Live
Management Features
Gleb Tsipursky
Here’s the true path to junior staff success
Jennifer V. Miller
When did that word become forbidden on the job?
Tina Behers
First, leaders must overcome their fear of failure
Harish Jose
Using OC curves to generate reliability/confidence values
Nellie Wartoft
Select your team with intention and foster collaboration

More Features

Management News
Research commissioned by the Aerospace & Defense PLM Action Group with Eurostep and leading PLM providers
Improved design of polarization-independent beam splitters
New industry-recognized guidelines for manufacturing jobs
ASQ will address absence of internationally recognized ESG benchmarks
Helping organizations improve quality and performance
Leading technologies empowering the next generation of 3D engineering software solutions
EstateSpace offers digital estate management system
New e-book on quality system management now available for pre-order

More News

Gleb Tsipursky


Four Challenges in Navigating Remote Work Layoffs

Putting the right policies and procedures in place

Published: Wednesday, March 15, 2023 - 12:03

One of the biggest challenges for companies in transitioning to remote work is their handling of layoffs. Having helped 21 companies transition to hybrid and remote work, I can attest that planning for the whole worker’s life cycle, from onboarding to offboarding, is critical as part of effective remote and hybrid work strategies.

Impersonal layoffs

One of the most significant challenges of remote work is the lack of personal interaction between employees and their managers. In the past, layoffs were usually carried out face-to-face, allowing for a more compassionate and human approach. However, with remote work, many companies are resorting to laying off employees via email.

This approach can be seen as cold and insensitive, causing significant harm to employee morale and company culture. In some cases, this can lead to legal action or negative press for the company, as it did for Google, Twitter, Amazon, and Meta, with news stories about how all recently laid off their employees by email.

You’re less likely to be trashed in the media for impersonal layoffs if you’re not a big company, unless of course your email is completely tone-deaf. For instance, PagerDuty CEO Jennifer Tejada was forced to apologize after sending an email to employees announcing that the company would be slashing 7 percent of its total workforce. The email quoted Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., with Tejada writing:

“I am reminded in moments like this, of something Martin Luther King said, that ‘the ultimate measure of a [leader] is not where [they] stand in the moments of comfort and convenience, but where [they] stand in times of challenge and controversy...’ PagerDuty is a leader that stands behind its customers, its values, and our vision—for an equitable world where we transform critical work so all teams can delight their customers and build trust.”

Such off-tone messaging reveals the serious lack of personal care and empathy of email layoffs, which are particularly damaging to remote employees.

Returning equipment

Remote work has resulted in many employees who work from home using company-owned equipment such as laptops, phones, and other devices, as well as furniture such as ergonomic standing desks and chairs. When a layoff occurs, companies must navigate the process of retrieving this equipment from remote employees.

This can be a time-consuming and costly process, especially if the equipment isn’t returned in a timely manner. Companies must have clear policies and procedures in place to ensure that this process is as smooth and efficient as possible.

It’s important to recognize that in some instances, returning equipment and especially furniture isn’t cost-efficient for companies. In that case, the company’s leadership often decides to leave the furniture to the employee.

However, what I help my clients recognize is that doing so comes with problematic implications. The tax authorities would interpret the furniture as a payment to the employee, which must be taxed. Thus, the employee may be stuck with a large tax bill on top of being laid off: That’s bad for the employee and for the company, which would land in hot water in the press!

What we eventually figured out for my clients was having HR tell laid-off employees to donate to a local charity the furniture and any equipment that’s not cost-effective to return. That way, the IRS doesn’t get involved, since the furniture doesn’t end up on an employee’s W-2 form. And whether the employee actually donates the furniture is up to them (of course, realistically, most don’t, but the tax problem is solved).

Navigating legal requirements

And speaking of IRS involvement, layoffs can have significant legal implications; companies must be aware of the laws and regulations that apply to layoffs in their jurisdiction. With remote workers, there are many jurisdictions to consider. The laws surrounding layoffs in a remote work environment can be complex and difficult to navigate, especially for companies with employees in multiple states and countries.

For example, different states may have different requirements for notice periods, severance packages, and unemployment benefits. In addition, some countries may have stricter requirements for redundancy procedures, which can make the layoff process more challenging for companies.

It’s critical for companies to be knowledgeable about the legal requirements that apply to their remote work layoffs. Noncompliance with these laws and regulations can have significant consequences, including fines, legal action, and damage to the company’s reputation.

Moreover, noncompliant layoffs can also harm the morale and productivity of the remaining employees. This is because employees may feel that the company isn’t treating them fairly and transparently, which can lead to a decline in morale and productivity.

To mitigate the risk of legal noncompliance during remote work layoffs, companies must seek legal advice and guidance. This includes obtaining a clear understanding of the laws and regulations that apply to their jurisdiction, as well as seeking guidance on how to comply with these requirements during the layoff process.

By seeking legal advice and guidance, companies can ensure that their remote work layoffs are compliant and effective. This will help to minimize the risk of legal consequences and maintain the morale and productivity of the remaining employees.

Difficulty in assessing performance

When employees work remotely, it becomes more difficult for managers to observe their work, see how they interact with others, and assess their contributions to the company. This can lead to an incomplete or inaccurate picture of an employee’s performance and, as a result, managers may make decisions about layoffs based on incorrect information.

In one example, a midsize IT company laid off a top-performing remote employee based on the manager lacking a personal connection to the employee, without considering their contributions to projects and the effect they had on team morale. This not only resulted in the loss of a valuable employee, but the company suffered as well.

In another example, a large financial services company laid off several employees who were critical to the success of a major project. These employees were performing well, but their contributions were not fully appreciated by the manager, who wasn’t able to see the full scope of their work. This led to delays and increased costs for the project, and ultimately, a loss of credibility for the company.

These examples demonstrate how remote work can complicate performance assessment and lead to problematic layoffs. Cognitive biases can be especially problematic in assessing performance. These biases are mental shortcuts that our minds take to simplify complex information and help us make decisions, which often lead to errors in judgment and decision-making.

For example, the confirmation bias is a cognitive bias that causes us to seek out information that confirms our existing beliefs while ignoring information that contradicts them. In the context of remote work layoffs, a manager may have a preconceived notion of an employee's performance, and this can lead to a confirmation bias that affects the assessment of that employee.

Another cognitive bias that can affect remote work layoffs is the empathy gap, which is the difficulty in imagining or understanding the feelings, thoughts, or motivations of others. This can lead to a lack of appreciation for an employee’s contributions, which can result in incorrect decisions about layoffs.

These biases stem from the proximity bias—the tendency of leaders to favor those who are near to them and with whom they build a personal relationship more than with remote workers, who are usually more productive than their in-office counterparts. Managers need to be trained to overcome the proximity bias, and the consequent confirmation bias and empathy gap that undermine effective remote work layoffs.


The shift to remote work has complicated layoffs in several ways, presenting new challenges for companies. To ensure that layoffs are carried out in a manner that’s sensitive, effective, and compliant, companies must be prepared to address the four major issues discussed in this article. With the right policies and procedures in place, companies can navigate the complexities of layoffs in the remote work era, minimizing the effect on employees and maintaining the health and well-being of their business.


About The Author

Gleb Tsipursky’s picture

Gleb Tsipursky

Dr. Gleb Tsipursky helps quality professionals make the wisest decisions on the future of work as the CEO of the boutique future-of-work consultancy Disaster Avoidance Experts. A proud Ukrainian American, he is the best-selling author of seven books, including Never Go With Your Gut: How Pioneering Leaders Make the Best Decisions and Avoid Business Disasters and Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams: A Manual on Benchmarking to Best Practices for Competitive Advantage. His cutting-edge thought leadership has been featured in more than 650 articles in prominent publications such as Harvard Business Review, Fortune, and USA Today. His expertise comes from more than 20 years of consulting for Fortune 500 companies from Aflac to Xerox and more than 15 years in academia as a cognitive scientist at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill and Ohio State. Contact him at Gleb[at]DisasterAvoidanceExperts[dot]com, Twitter@gleb_tsipursky, Instagram@dr_gleb_tsipurskyLinkedIn, and register for his Wise Decision Maker Course


I find this curious.

"What we eventually figured out for my clients was having HR tell laid-off employees to donate to a local charity the furniture and any equipment that’s not cost-effective to return. That way, the IRS doesn’t get involved, since the furniture doesn’t end up on an employee’s W-2 form. And whether the employee actually donates the furniture is up to them (of course, realistically, most don’t, but the tax problem is solved)."

Either the furniture is a real problem or it isn't. If it is, I have an extremely hard time believing that the IRS is going to be happy when they ask about it, and you tell them that "it's cool. Someone other than this employee's supervisor assigned him a task that we had no expectation he would complete, and this means that no taxes were owed." 

Also, how did you "eventually" figure this out? Did you ask an attorney, and you are passing on the legal advice you received? Or was there merely a perception of a legal grey area, and this was how you recommended the company show good faith in case of the slim chance that it does become a problem?