Redundancies during Covid-19

Forums › Off topic › Redundancies during Covid-19

sonyxperiageek

2958 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#270130 24-Apr-2020 21:05

I wonder how many employers will be using the excuse of Covid-19 as a way to finally rid some of their employees while masked as redundancy due to a "decline in revenue".

Bauer was potentially one we knew of.

I mean, it seems as long as employers have followed through the usual redundancy processes (including restructural proposals and saying that they will "consider any alternative solution" and act in "good faith") and state that covid-19 has had an impact on their revenue, it's very hard for the employee to prove that they actually "considered an alternative solution", or if they are the only employee to be laid off in the whole company "due to covid-19 revenue decline". Especially if you find out that the next day, it seems like everyone else went to work but you.

Just my thoughts, and not me affected personally, but know of someone who has.

Sony

vexxxboy

4244 posts

Uber Geek

#2470572 24-Apr-2020 21:09

Restaurant Brands changing delivery drivers to independent contractors when level 3 starts.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/121204016/coronavirus-kfc-pizza-hut-hiring-drivers-as-contractors-not-employees-for-level-3

Common sense is not as common as you think.

nitro

656 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2470599 24-Apr-2020 23:13

for starters, there really isn't any business that wasn't affected by covid-19. none.

and to my mind, bauer is pretty close to useless (in today's world) anyway. there is no sane argument that you can't get whatever information their peddling from somewhere else.

i never really liked redundancies, but at the end of the day, businesses need to look out for their interests ahead of their employees. anybody who has worked for some time will understand this. for good or bad, no business really cares about their employees more than their shareholders.

it's an ugly situation, but it's also the truth, unfortunately...

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2470603 24-Apr-2020 23:23

nitro:

for starters, there really isn't any business that wasn't affected by covid-19. none.

and to my mind, bauer is pretty close to useless (in today's world) anyway. there is no sane argument that you can't get whatever information their peddling from somewhere else.

i never really liked redundancies, but at the end of the day, businesses need to look out for their interests ahead of their employees. anybody who has worked for some time will understand this. for good or bad, no business really cares about their employees more than their shareholders.

it's an ugly situation, but it's also the truth, unfortunately...

Absolutely right. Businesses are not charities.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2470845 25-Apr-2020 11:20

They are beneficiaries though.

elpenguino

3419 posts

Uber Geek

#2470885 25-Apr-2020 12:05

sonyxperiageek: Especially if you find out that the next day, it seems like everyone else went to work but you.

From talking to others who have been through this its my understanding that it is positions which are made redundant, not people. This means if you have 10 developers but the employer only wants five, all ten can apply for those five positions.

If youre in a one of a kind role, middle managers - Im looking at you, then yes, things can be precarious.

There should be no surprises.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2470890 25-Apr-2020 12:17

Fred99:

They are beneficiaries though.

Oh don't you there point to reality. Herbert Simon (Nobel Prize winner in economics) has, for example, quite persuasively argued that social capital is in fact likely a far greater determiner of one's income than so called hard work or individual contribution. See this.

sonyxperiageek

2958 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2470892 25-Apr-2020 12:20

elpenguino:

sonyxperiageek: Especially if you find out that the next day, it seems like everyone else went to work but you.

From talking to others who have been through this its my understanding that it is positions which are made redundant, not people. This means if you have 10 developers but the employer only wants five, all ten can apply for those five positions.

If youre in a one of a kind role, middle managers - Im looking at you, then yes, things can be precarious.

There should be no surprises.

That's correct, redundancy should only be about the position and not to do with the person. But my point in my earlier post was that let's say in your developer example, they now only want five developers but they currently have 10. Some companies may simply get rid of the five they didn't like in the first place and keep the other five, and could've been personal reasons why they didn't like them, but could be very hard to prove, especially if they follow the redundancy process properly, it'll be hard to prove it was an unjustified dismissal or unfair disadvantage for example.

Sony

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

elpenguino

3419 posts

Uber Geek

#2470900 25-Apr-2020 12:29

Yes, if applications are taken, applicant X may be unsuccessful as he's known not to be a team player.

I believe there's provisions to stop an employer using redundancy to cover poor recruitment though. This is to stop another five positions being created within a certain time period.

I have seen redundancy used as a weapon at work though. Management can dress it up all they like but the telltale signs give it away.
And then magically after a year, they need someone in that role again.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

antonknee

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#2470937 25-Apr-2020 13:18

Having been through several redundancies, I will forever be (completely un) surprised at the number of times positions are made redundant, and then in a few months time it turns out that oh actually those positions were needed.

I find businesses are often not very smart when they consider organisational design, and they often fail to look at the reality of the work actually being done. Instead they just want $ savings or to hit a particular number. In particular this is evident when it’s actually the processes that suck - simplify the process first then flex the staff levels to suit.