\n
![](\"https:\/\/content.fortune.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/GettyImages-1438223338-e1707605591135.jpg?w=2048\")
<\/p>\n [ad_1]
\n<\/p>\n
Have you suffered an \u201cinvoluntary career event\u201d recently? Perhaps you were a casualty of \u201ccorporate outplacing,\u201d the unfortunate, yet ostensibly necessary result of your company \u201crightsizing.\u201d Managers are running out of ways to say you no longer have a job.<\/p>\n
Layoffs in the first month of 2024 have left tens of thousands without jobs, with the tech industry alone cutting\u00a032,000 roles<\/a>. The way the bad news is delivered is more important than ever, as companies\u00a0fear being canceled<\/a>\u00a0on social media after a poorly executed final conversation. Executives are using all kinds of euphemisms to avoid being straightforward with their employees.<\/p>\n Harvard Business School professor Sandra Sucher said that delicate language is the result of \u201cmoral disengagement,\u201d a harm-doer\u2019s effort to rationalize and soften the action for themselves. Ultimately, the meaning is the same to the worker: They\u2019re losing their job.<\/p>\n \u201cThe fact that you\u2019re calling it downsizing or an org change \u2014 which it very well probably is \u2014 doesn\u2019t mean that workers are not going to feel something as a result of what you\u2019re doing,\u201d said Sucher.<\/p>\n A lexicon to describe layoffs euphemistically became more common in the late 1980s and 1990s as job cuts were normalized, according to Sucher. Previously, layoffs were more rare, and mostly the result of a manufacturer closing its plant in a town.<\/p>\n In early December, Spotify<\/a> Technology SA\u00a0opted<\/a>\u00a0for the term \u201cright-sized\u201d in its letter announcing job cuts. Citigroup<\/a> Inc.\u2019s statement in November\u00a0referenced<\/a>\u00a0a \u201csimplified operating model\u201d to describe its plans to cut 20,000 jobs. At Meta Platforms<\/a> Inc., Mark Zuckerberg\u00a0referred<\/a>\u00a0to \u201corg changes\u201d in a lengthy memo that included an array of personnel shifts at the company, including job losses. And United Parcel Service<\/a> Inc.\u00a0announced<\/a>\u00a0a \u201cworkforce reduction\u201d of 12,000 people during its most recent earnings call. \u201cWe are going to fit our organization to our strategy,\u201d Chief Executive Officer Carol Tom\u00e9 said, according to a\u00a0transcript<\/a>.<\/p>\n Executives believe that this kind of vague language placates workers, according to Stanford professor Robert Sutton. He called the \u201canesthetizing\u201d language \u201cjargon monoxide.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThey somehow seem to believe that if they use language that is more vague and less emotional, that people won\u2019t get as upset,\u201d said Sutton. Instead, it has the opposite effect, he said.<\/p>\n The general shift away from the word \u201cfiring\u201d is likely because of the stigma associated with it, according to Wayne Cascio, a professor at CU Denver Business School. \u201cLayoffs\u201d is used to describe dismissal without cause, while a \u201cfiring\u201d is now typically in response to a breach of company rules.<\/p>\n Synonyms for layoffs aren\u2019t entirely without purpose. They have differences in their breadth of potential meaning that help a company sort out next steps. \u201cSimplification\u201d can mean people are going to be fired, or that the company is cutting back on meetings. \u201cRestructuring,\u201d on the other hand, can also just signify that an employee is moving departments. A \u201cfurlough\u201d is something entirely different, allowing employees to return to work after unpaid time away. \u201cRightsizing\u201d is intentionally vague so the company leaves itself room to change its plan, according to Cascio.<\/p>\n Phrasing can also vary by region, according to Sucher, who said that \u201creduction in force\u201d was used more commonly in Europe.<\/p>\n In general, there is a good way to announce a layoff, and it\u2019s not euphemistically. Company leaders should take accountability for the loss of jobs, the experts said, especially because many are responding to their own over-hiring post-pandemic.<\/p>\n \u201cYou have to acknowledge the fact that you have done something that you understand has hurt their life in a very direct way,\u201d said Sucher.<\/p>\n<\/div>\nSubscribe to CHRO Daily, our newsletter focusing on helping HR executive navigate the changing needs of the workplace. Sign up<\/a> for free.<\/div>\n