The Hidden Costs of Layoffs at Procter & Gamble: What Employees and Retirees Need to Know

Healthcare Provider Update: Healthcare Provider for Procter & Gamble Procter & Gamble typically collaborates with a range of health insurance providers to offer coverage to its employees. Although specific details regarding their primary healthcare provider may vary, they often include major insurers like Aetna, UnitedHealthcare, and Blue Cross Blue Shield, which provide comprehensive benefits tailored to their workforce. Potential Healthcare Cost Increases for Procter & Gamble in 2026 As health insurance rates soar, Procter & Gamble employees may face significant increases in their healthcare costs in 2026. With projections indicating that ACA marketplace premiums may rise by more than 60% in some areas, employees relying on these plans could see their out-of-pocket expenses balloon by over 75% if enhanced federal subsidies expire. Contributing factors include heightened medical costs, aggressive rate hikes from major insurers, and the potential loss of financial assistance that currently mitigates premium expenses. This confluence of challenges could substantially strain budgets for many P&G employees seeking health coverage next year. Click here to learn more

When a significant company like Procter & Gamble faces the tough decision of layoffs, the immediate financial consequences can often be surprising. For example, when a tech giant announced cuts in November 2022 involving 11,000 employees, the separation expenses alone amounted to nearly $975 million, averaging over $88,000 per affected employee. While these costs are substantial, they were reported to be offset by reductions in current expenses such as salaries, bonuses, and other benefits.

The Real Price of Layoffs at Procter & Gamble

Accounting for layoffs by simply calculating cost reductions and immediate savings can often overlook the deeper, more hidden costs. Research and expert analysis suggest that layoffs can disrupt productivity, morale, and overall company performance. Procter & Gamble employees might experience fear and a decline in morale, resulting in decreased work quality and an increase in workplace accidents and product defects. Additionally, companies like Procter & Gamble often face higher turnover rates, necessitating extra expenses to hire and train new employees. Other financial consequences include increased unemployment insurance tax rates and potential legal costs from discrimination lawsuits.

Indirect Costs and Long-term Impact for Procter & Gamble

According to Wayne Cascio, a renowned professor at the University of Colorado-Denver Business School, companies that opt for temporary measures such as furloughs instead of direct layoffs tend to regenerate and perform better financially up to two years later. This finding could be relevant for Procter & Gamble when considering different strategies to manage workforce reductions.

Separation Practices Across Industries and at Procter & Gamble

The approach to separation varies significantly across industries and geographic regions, and Procter & Gamble's practices might reflect this diversity. For instance, a quarter of U.S. companies ensure separation for all employees, while the global rate is slightly over 42%. In the healthcare sector, companies often offer more favorable terms, which can include extended medical benefits and compensation for increased leave time. As an example, Theseus Pharmaceuticals Inc. provided a severance package averaging $212,000 to each laid-off employee, one of the highest recorded by Bloomberg’s analysis. Understanding how Procter & Gamble's approach compares can provide insights into industry best practices.

Productivity Decline Post-Layoff at Procter & Gamble

Data from ActivTrak, which monitors employee efficiency through software, shows a tangible decrease in productivity following layoffs. For instance, among  seven companies  studied from January 2022 to April 2024, the average working time dropped by nearly an hour per day. This results in a loss of about 18 hours per month per employee, leading to significant financial losses over time. Procter & Gamble might need to consider these productivity impacts when planning workforce reductions.

Long-term Costs of Increased Turnover at Procter & Gamble

Implementing layoffs leads to an increase in voluntary turnover rates, which can be more costly than the layoffs themselves. According to a  hypothetical study  based on a company of 10,000 employees, if 10% of its workforce were laid off, voluntary quit rates could increase by 49%, leading to significant costs to replace these individuals, often amounting to 1.25 times their annual salary. Procter & Gamble could face similar challenges, requiring careful planning to mitigate these long-term costs.

Featured Video

Articles you may find interesting:

Legal and Compliance Costs for Procter & Gamble

The legal framework related to layoffs is complex and varies by state. Companies like Procter & Gamble engage external experts to ensure compliance with employment laws and to minimize the risk of discrimination lawsuits. Labor economists like Mike DuMond from the Berkeley Research Group often conduct several rounds of demographic analysis to ensure layoffs do not unfairly target protected groups. Additionally, the costs related to legal compliance, including the requirement for WARN Act notifications for mass layoffs, add another layer of expense.

Conclusion for Procter & Gamble Employees

The decision to proceed with layoffs, although often seen as a necessary step to cut expenses, involves many hidden and delayed costs. These encompass not only direct financial burdens such as separation and legal fees but also long-term consequences on employee productivity and Procter & Gamble's reputation. Understanding these complex dynamics is crucial for Procter & Gamble when contemplating workforce reductions as a strategy to cope with financial difficulties.