Redundancies- is the new way better?

[AVB]

I am doing a small piece of work for a fund manager that will be making 100 people redundant from a team of 500. In the ‘old days’ the respective manager(s) would have decided who was to go (including people who were happy to go). These people would be called in en-mass one morning, given their notice, details of their payment, a compromise agreement to sign and a black bin liner to clear their desk. Then escorted off the premises. It was quick, and whilst sometimes painful for those impacted, those not being made redundant weren't affected. It was like ripping off a plaster quickly.  

Nowadays, the whole team of 500 need to be ‘put at risk’ and a 45 day ‘consultation’ takes place whilst the 100 are selected through careful analysis of various criteria before being told. Then you get the inevitability challenging of the criteria by some which delays things even more. 
 

so you have a whole team of 500 who are worried and productivity obviously plummets. 
 

I know what I think is a better process for all concerned. 

[Demonic69]

6 minutes ago, AVB said:

I am doing a small piece of work for a fund manager that will be making 100 people redundant from a team of 500. In the ‘old days’ the respective manager(s) would have decided who was to go (including people who were happy to go). These people would be called in en-mass one morning, given their notice, details of their payment, a compromise agreement to sign and a black bin liner to clear their desk. Then escorted off the premises. It was quick, and whilst sometimes painful for those impacted, those not being made redundant weren't affected. It was like ripping off a plaster quickly.  

Nowadays, the whole team of 500 need to be ‘put at risk’ and a 45 day ‘consultation’ takes place whilst the 100 are selected through careful analysis of various criteria before being told. Then you get the inevitability challenging of the criteria by some which delays things even more. 
 

so you have a whole team of 500 who are worried and productivity obviously plummets. 
 

I know what I think is a better process for all concerned. 

I've just been through it twice in the last 4 months. Out of my peers, 27 out of 63 have been up for redundancy. We had notice of being at risk, the process explained then had to wait 2 weeks before we found out who was going. In that 2 weeks the management compile a Detailed Assessment Form and a score for each of us, with the lowest being the ones to go. They than have 30 days to appeal or search for internal vacancies. We're still at risk for those 30 days as they have to meet the numbers if someone appeals successfully. 

I was really hard the first time, then to be up for selection 3 months later was even tougher!

[grrclark]

Mass consultations are a nightmare to manage for the reason that you suggest, people start to feel insecure, the talent leaves and the less talented stay but productivity drops off.

Shedding 900 jobs over two and a bit years in one facility highlighted that to me.

[sam triple]

Was laid off in August after being furloughed in March the whole process was a joke , it was done on scoring method they couldn’t fault me on , time keeping , sickness / attendance , output , quality but instead was ousted on an almost fraudulent decision by scoring me on 2 machines I couldn’t run , was never asked to run or received training on them as per company’s own H&S regulations, but the decision was made along with 110 others all on highest grade wages plus final salary pension, so most of the experience has gone and all that are left are lower grade relatively new starters , union did nothing but seems like the head convener was in on it all 

[powler]

We have just been through this, the whole site was closed down even though we out performed three other sites put together one even lost over five million pound last year, but it is down to us being bought out by a competitor for our order book, we had some very big customers. Some of which were ordering extra stock before we shut down as they were about to jump ship and go to another supplier.

We went from a fantastic team of people to just a number when we got bought out and I have learned a big lesson that I will never bust a gut for a big company as our story shows that no matter how much care you have about your job and the team around you. Some of the staff had been there over forty two years, myself twenty four years.

Mick

[AVB]

2 minutes ago, sam triple said:

Was laid off in August after being furloughed in March the whole process was a joke , it was done on scoring method they couldn’t fault me on , time keeping , sickness / attendance , output , quality but instead was ousted on an almost fraudulent decision by scoring me on 2 machines I couldn’t run , was never asked to run or received training on them as per company’s own H&S regulations, but the decision was made along with 110 others all on highest grade wages plus final salary pension, so most of the experience has gone and all that are left are lower grade relatively new starters , union did nothing but seems like the head convener was in on it all 

And whilst it may seem unfair it is the realty. In the past the result would have been the same but would have been done quickly and with less worry. 

[powler]

4 minutes ago, sam triple said:

Was laid off in August after being furloughed in March the whole process was a joke , it was done on scoring method they couldn’t fault me on , time keeping , sickness / attendance , output , quality but instead was ousted on an almost fraudulent decision by scoring me on 2 machines I couldn’t run , was never asked to run or received training on them as per company’s own H&S regulations, but the decision was made along with 110 others all on highest grade wages plus final salary pension, so most of the experience has gone and all that are left are lower grade relatively new starters , union did nothing but seems like the head convener was in on it all 

Sorry to hear this Sam, and unions are a waste of time, will never be in a union again.

Mick

[The Heron]

There is no easy way to do this in the old days it was last in first out. 

[oldypigeonpopper]

39 minutes ago, sam triple said:

Was laid off in August after being furloughed in March the whole process was a joke , it was done on scoring method they couldn’t fault me on , time keeping , sickness / attendance , output , quality but instead was ousted on an almost fraudulent decision by scoring me on 2 machines I couldn’t run , was never asked to run or received training on them as per company’s own H&S regulations, but the decision was made along with 110 others all on highest grade wages plus final salary pension, so most of the experience has gone and all that are left are lower grade relatively new starters , union did nothing but seems like the head convener was in on it all 

Hello, yes and when all back to normal and more staff required will be cheapest pay, and don't get me started on unions,🤔 anyway hope you are now ok, 

[Scully]

They must do things differently nowadays!
Rumours abounded in our factory in which most of the town was employed, for about a month, that we had been bought out by another company, and we were assured by top management that the rumours were untrue ( as it transpired it was to keep the local farmers from looking for another buyer for their milk yields ) and then obviously after the deed was done, we were all informed by letter on the same day that production would cease and the factory close on such and such a date, and the work force would be made redundant and that was that. Happy days. 🙂
 

[grrclark]

15 minutes ago, Scully said:

They must do things differently nowadays!
Rumours abounded in our factory in which most of the town was employed, for about a month, that we had been bought out by another company, and we were assured by top management that the rumours were untrue ( as it transpired it was to keep the local farmers from looking for another buyer for their milk yields ) and then obviously after the deed was done, we were all informed by letter on the same day that production would cease and the factory close on such and such a date, and the work force would be made redundant and that was that. Happy days. 🙂
 

Yep, now you would have to get a letter 45 days before advising that there was a risk of that and then it would happen anyway.

[sam triple]

1 hour ago, powler said:

Sorry to hear this Sam, and unions are a waste of time, will never be in a union again.

Mick

No first thing I did was cancel my subscription week later they were on the phone asking why , then I gave them both barrels and told them what a joke their man was 

1 hour ago, oldypigeonpopper said:

Hello, yes and when all back to normal and more staff required will be cheapest pay, and don't get me started on unions,🤔 anyway hope you are now ok, 

Got a job on a temporary contract , poor money better than no money and certainly better than job seekers allowance 

33 minutes ago, grrclark said:

Yep, now you would have to get a letter 45 days before advising that there was a risk of that and then it would happen anyway.

Exactly that 

[bluesj]

If anyone is having the same sort of problems in east sussex and can drive a 7 and 1/2 ton truck we might be looking for a driver short term.

[discobob]

16 hours ago, bluesj said:

If anyone is having the same sort of problems in east sussex and can drive a 7 and 1/2 ton truck we might be looking for a driver short term.

Fantastic offer @bluesj - good to see the community helping out

19 hours ago, oldypigeonpopper said:

Hello, yes and when all back to normal and more staff required will be cheapest pay, and don't get me started on unions,🤔 anyway hope you are now ok, 

I don't like minimum wage - it is a false bottom that everybody has raced to - rather than paying on the salient points of a particular job. Somebody in a card shop - minimum wage - somebody doing extreme physical labour for 9 hours a day - minimum wage

[oldypigeonpopper]

2 minutes ago, discobob said:

Fantastic offer @bluesj - good to see the community helping out

I don't like minimum wage - it is a false bottom that everybody has raced to - rather than paying on the salient points of a particular job. Somebody in a card shop - minimum wage - somebody doing extreme physical labour for 9 hours a day - minimum wage

Hello, I feel sorry for anyone caught up in this difficult time with employment situations, furlough, self employed, laid off, or redundancies, 

[sam triple]

15 minutes ago, discobob said:

Fantastic offer @bluesj - good to see the community helping out

I don't like minimum wage - it is a false bottom that everybody has raced to - rather than paying on the salient points of a particular job. Somebody in a card shop - minimum wage - somebody doing extreme physical labour for 9 hours a day - minimum wage

No but like I say it’s better than £75 a week on JSA , I’m  1/3 down on wages to what I was on but the trouble is with so many looking for work all the employers can simply drop hourly rate to minimum wage even big multi nationals have done £12.50 ph is good around here at the mo 🙈

[Yellow Bear]

25 minutes ago, discobob said:

Fantastic offer @bluesj - good to see the community helping out

I don't like minimum wage - it is a false bottom that everybody has raced to - rather than paying on the salient points of a particular job. Somebody in a card shop - minimum wage - somebody doing extreme physical labour for 9 hours a day - minimum wage

An other "plus" from a Leiboor government to "help" the working man     ( where is the sarcasm emoji when you need it) 

[Mice!]

21 hours ago, sam triple said:

union did nothing but seems like the head convener was in on it all 

The convener has normally been there years, is useless and feathers his own nest.

Someone no doubt get rid of the higher paid lads, they don't worry about the loss of experience as they have no idea what goes on on the shop floor anyway. 

22 hours ago, AVB said:

Nowadays, the whole team of 500 need to be ‘put at risk’ and a 45 da

How far back are you going? Its always been everyone gets notice that I know of going back to late 90s, ask for volunteers,  which often seemed like a pay off for the old boys, or good lads would jump with a wedge and why not, then it was down to the Bradford scale, so years service count in your favour.

I personally think the 45 days is a good thing, once a company gets to this point its normally a poor working environment anyway, so if you haven't been there long you start looking, I've left a few places before redundancies have come in as there was another job available,  or something lined up once paid off for a few years service. 

[Scully]

20 hours ago, grrclark said:

Yep, now you would have to get a letter 45 days before advising that there was a risk of that and then it would happen anyway.

Quite. Our local MP at the time ( David Maclean ) made all the right noises as politicians do, but that's all it was, noise. We were given tuition in basic IT skills, which may have come in handy for seeking jobs online ( not that any of us had PC's back then ) and that was about it. 

To be quite honest, at the time it was both terrifying and exciting, but my sympathies go out to those affected by such circumstances. 

[scolopax]

I am fortunate to work on the oil rigs in Norway. Here they have a very strict last in / first out system.   Great if you have a few years service in, but lots of dead wood know they are safe and can if they want take the P with their work effort and conduct. It is also extremely difficult to fire anyone. Once they have a contract they are bullet proof. 

For those getting made redundant there is no severance pay, 3 months notice which you are expected to work, although some do immediately go on sick, on full pay.  But unemployment benefit is good, not sure of details but capped at about £2,000 take home I think. But you have to be resident in Norway, paying into their system is not enough to qualify. 

[AVB]

1 hour ago, Mice! said:

The convener has normally been there years, is useless and feathers his own nest.

Someone no doubt get rid of the higher paid lads, they don't worry about the loss of experience as they have no idea what goes on on the shop floor anyway. 

How far back are you going? Its always been everyone gets notice that I know of going back to late 90s, ask for volunteers,  which often seemed like a pay off for the old boys, or good lads would jump with a wedge and why not, then it was down to the Bradford scale, so years service count in your favour.

I personally think the 45 days is a good thing, once a company gets to this point its normally a poor working environment anyway, so if you haven't been there long you start looking, I've left a few places before redundancies have come in as there was another job available,  or something lined up once paid off for a few years service. 

It’s not the notice period it’s the consultation period that bothers me and the fact that you need to put people ‘at risk’ who you have no intention of making redundant. Through the 80’s, 90’s and 00’s you could just pick people and make them redundant. Or the companies I worked for did. 

[williamwansbeck]

On 02/10/2020 at 14:31, powler said:

We have just been through this, the whole site was closed down even though we out performed three other sites put together one even lost over five million pound last year, but it is down to us being bought out by a competitor for our order book, we had some very big customers. Some of which were ordering extra stock before we shut down as they were about to jump ship and go to another supplier.

We went from a fantastic team of people to just a number when we got bought out and I have learned a big lesson that I will never bust a gut for a big company as our story shows that no matter how much care you have about your job and the team around you. Some of the staff had been there over forty two years, myself twenty four years.

Mick

An old quote from the construction industry,WORK RIGHT HARD AND DEE YOUR BEST BUT YOUR DOON THE ROAD WITH AAL THE REST

[12gauge82]

On 02/10/2020 at 13:42, AVB said:

I am doing a small piece of work for a fund manager that will be making 100 people redundant from a team of 500. In the ‘old days’ the respective manager(s) would have decided who was to go (including people who were happy to go). These people would be called in en-mass one morning, given their notice, details of their payment, a compromise agreement to sign and a black bin liner to clear their desk. Then escorted off the premises. It was quick, and whilst sometimes painful for those impacted, those not being made redundant weren't affected. It was like ripping off a plaster quickly.  

Nowadays, the whole team of 500 need to be ‘put at risk’ and a 45 day ‘consultation’ takes place whilst the 100 are selected through careful analysis of various criteria before being told. Then you get the inevitability challenging of the criteria by some which delays things even more. 
 

so you have a whole team of 500 who are worried and productivity obviously plummets. 
 

I know what I think is a better process for all concerned. 

I think it's a better system for the employees, these days, sector dependent at least they have a chance at sorting other employment out, particularly in lower paid sectors. 

It's obviously worse for a lot of employers as they tend to lose good staff they have no intention of getting rid of who jump incase they're pushed. 

Not a nice business regardless of which side your on. I don't envey your job much. 

[armsid]

i was made redundant from JAGUAR in the 90,s last in first out basis and i had 22 yrs  in maintenance .The plant closed 2 yrs later after many promises that it was safe. the main problem now is we do not make anything, but import and companies were not taking on apprentices as they could recruit from europe ready trained so lots of jobs are minimum wage ,call centres can be located anywhere on the planet so finding good jobs at this time that will pay mortgages will be hard to find and the bosses know this

[yod dropper]

This system won't have been brought in for the benefit of the various organisations and will be detrimental to the workforce and hence the organisation. Yet more unintended consequences from trying to make things better.