Plus, their certified preowned is worthless. They dropped a used car off in the same condition as they picked it up from the previous owner, and let me waste time fixing issues under their 90 day warranty.
First car shook badly during acceleration, obvious drivetrain problems. Second car did not even pass state inspection, and they already sold my trade so now I’m stuck with it?
On top of that, they took 45 days to pay off the loan on my trade-in, and underpaid it. They sneakily pulled another 10-day pay off quote 45 days after taking my trade and stiffed me out of 2 months of payments made to keep the old loan in good standing.
Absolutely horrible experience. Hope they go under completely.
that was four years ago. car's in great shape still even after several tens of thousands of miles.
they paid off the old auto loan within a few weeks. it was straightforward.
only tesla has this experience beat, but it's close. i hope they expand.
There are so many causes for legal action these days the announcements in general have to be very bland.
Note I forget who it was, but there was a post or short video a while back predicting exactly this - 10% layoffs. Some driven by sales, others by companies using the cover of the economy to drop folks they'd like to have rotated out etc. This sounds superficially sales related, but don't know how carvana is doing to judge
The liability comes in how they select who they lay off and the actions taken prior to lay off.
This is simply laziness.
A ton of liability has been created historically based on what is said at the time of a termination.
I personally don't like managers who say how hard the layoff is for them, the employee does NOT care. Just get to the point "I have some bad news to share...."
If you are smaller, your emp practices insurance carrier would LOVE if you called them prior to laying someone or a few folks off. Almost all offer free support as this is THE area that generates a huge amount of claims.
Especially if it’s a day where people are being called in one by one to be told the bad news. Let me know on Zoom or hell just send an email and let me move on with my life.
It does not have to be awkward. The manager can show sympathy, and offer support as much as they can. The person who is being laid off may try to hit the job market right away, and the manager can offer guidance (what the employee should brush up on), references, could try to introduce them to acquaintances. Many times some lucky people manage to move internally, and the manager's support is invaluable in such cases.
And by the way, the manager can also say something like this: "tomorrow I may lose my job too, so I might need your reference, if you think I deserve it". And they should be truthful about it, because, honestly, nobody is immune from layoffs (if you think you are, then it means you are severely underpaid, so try to rectify that).
No matter how much they insist you can return a car you don't like, it obviously is just a manipulative way to get people to commit more, and earlier, and without negotiating, compared to the conventional method of buying a used car.
If it's a good business to be in, that's because they can sell worse cars for higher prices, and that's all. X% more in profit, systematically.
Somewhere, there were people saying "hmm, how can we brainwash people into not negotiating and settling for the first car they test drive?" Because that's been the ideal for dealers since the beginning of time.
Operational problems, if so, are the cherry on top. I suppose that unexpected falling-off of wheels happens when you start to run out of suckers.
This person was so unpleasant, I decided on the spot I would never buy a car from them, no matter how cool the vending machine or how great the deal.
Having worked in car sales and finance, I can tell you this is a big mistake. If Carvana's plan is to replace dealership staff with a robot and a security guard, then they will soon be out of business.
I wonder if they could have suffered from the supply crunch. Last I checked, 5-year-old Corollas were pushing $20k, and a new base model is about the same price.
Anecdotally, I checked Carvana and local dealers when I was looking for a car recently, because I usually buy $5k beaters and drive them into the ground. This time, it didn't make sense to risk a lemon when I could get a bumper-to-bumper warranty for the same price. So I waited until I could find something new at MSRP, and that was that.
> Workers who primarily travel, who are outstationed or whose duties involve work outside the employer's primary work sites are considered to be assigned to the single site of employment to which they are assigned in the employer's organizational structure, the home base from which work is assigned, or the home base to which workers report. (https://webapps.dol.gov/elaws/eta/warn/glossary.asp?p=Single...)
I dont think inventory is their issue, but rather the fact they are a lender more than a dealer. They just make a lot of questionable loans and repackage them for sale, sort of.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28733634
Stock now down over 90% from high.
There are no new base models available at dealerships and they're not expected any time soon. The list price hasn't caught up to the market conditions so they don't ship any base trim models. The higher trim models are available but dealerships charge 5-10k on top of list price.
For some incomprehensible reason people were buying the nearly-identical non-hybrid model for essentially the same price. It makes me think of the Bloom County cartoon: "Louise, dump the milk! The cat drinks unleaded from now on!"
Now, cars like mine, with 12K miles are being advertised for $30K, sometimes more.
In the meantime, my employer has just eliminated the health-based accommodations that let some people telecommute full time, just as we've got a solid month or so of rising covid cases and the governor setting policies tested positive.
"A good manager knows to give a layoff speech without creating legal liability."
No, this is not true. Many good managers, even nice managers can mess this up. It is not always obvious. Being a good manager is different than (sometimes somewhat arbitrary) things that generate legal liability.
"The liability comes in how they select who they lay off and the actions taken prior to lay off."
Again, this is totally false. MUCH legal liability is created AT THE POINT OF LAYOFF/TERMINATION. I happen to see this over and over. It's weird / scary to hear folks here deny this so brazenly. If you deal with wrongful termination cases a common first source of dispute will center around what was said / claimed at termination both too the employee or employees affected AND to others about the termination. Sure, you can get into statistics around groups and how selected etc, but practically if you can show the lies / inconsistencies in that good managers explanation for layoff provided right there (and there WILL be inconsistencies if they go on for a long time trying to justify / avoid hurt feelings etc) you can "skip to the good part $$$". I'll note that some of the biggest issues comes from nice to very nice managers, they often are sloppier with employee files, sloppier with boundaries and more. They are often liked - so the cases can be a bit of a bummer.
My point stands, some companies have a relatively scripted layoff for these larger layoffs that has gone through legal and other reviews. They don't always allow for a lot of back and forth discussion. Not all of course.
My point isn’t that managers don’t need assistance. My point is that managers don’t need to send a prerecorded message or read directly from a script.
Having consulted with legal, etc. a good manager can inform an employee of a layoff in a personal way.
Part of effectively laying off employee is minimizing hurt feelings. Some pain is inevitable, but adding to is asking for trouble (and bad PR).
Once someone is let go, they are often asked to give a “departure interview” - for legal reasons it’s best if they participate. If they can check box saying “I have no complaints about the company,” it will help avoid lawsuits.
This involves coordinating with legal, HR, etc.
But it also means an impersonal layoff is a bad idea.
Being afraid of lawsuits is a terrible reason let employees go in an insulting manner.
Edit: individual managers rarely (if ever) do layoffs on their own. it’s always a cross-company effort.