Coordinating Layoff Dismissals - Assignment Example

Coordinating layoff dismissals Propose three (3) ways that a manager can cope with any negative emotions that may accompany an employee layoff. After a company decides to lay off its employees, the manager’s central task encompasses focusing on the surviving labour force. This is because the surviving employees will be dealing with several emotions including anger, doubt, mistrust, fear and they may be struggling with very many questions (Harvard, 2009). The employees will be fearful that they might lose their jobs too in case there is another round of lay-offs. There might also be cynicism about the management’s ability to lead and sadness due to their colleagues leaving. Moreover, the surviving employees might be feeling guilty because they survived the lay off and their former colleagues did not or angry that the company acted unfairly. The manager’s job is to rebuild optimism and trust in the remaining employees by managing their emotions. The manager should further secure the employees’ obligation to the new direction that the company is going in. In addition, the managers should make the surviving employees an integral part in the new strategy developed (Harvard, 2009). Managing negative emotions after employee dismissal is primarily concerned with managing change. The upper management must define new strategy and direction for the company. All the emotions may reduce the employees’ morale. The manager has to rebuild employee morale by changing the priorities, work roles and processes. The manager must also make sure that the surviving employees understand that the termination had to be done and ensure that they support the company’s move. If this stage is handled effectively, the surviving employees will perform highly and support the new direction set by the company. This will be beneficial to the manager, his team and the company (Harvard, 2009). To reduce the likelihood of employees coming off strongly after they respective lay off, the mangers can release the negative emotions before or after their meeting with the employees of the unfavourable outcome. The managers can do this by talking to their employees before their dismissal and explaining to them that it is not their fault but situation is forcing the company to lay them off (Brockner, 2010). Laid off employees agree that issuing public statements about their dismissal makes it worse. Therefore, it is better for managers to be sensitive about the whole issue and not to make it public knowledge before even the laid off employees have a chance to tell their friends and families (Noer, 2009). A study carried out in a manufacturing plant to find out why the angry employees who have been dismissed tend to come back and steal from the companies. They study showed that their emotions especially anger, made them do that. To avoid these strong emotions that may cost the company a lot of money, managers can use high levels of sensitivity when explaining about their dismissal. Managers can also justifications and respect rules when talking to the employees about laying them off (Oreg, Michel & By, 2013). Describe a step-by-step process of conducting the dismissal meeting. An employee must be provided with written statements explaining the alleged conduct that led to the company contemplating to dismiss him/ her. The employee must then be invited to a meeting to discuss the matter further. The statement should only state the employee risks dismissal. Before the meeting, the employee must be given a reasonable amount of time so that he/ she can prepare for his/ her response. The time and location of the meeting should be convenient for all the parties involved (Employment law, 2014). The manager should conduct the human resource representative to ask for assistance in conducting an employee termination meeting. The human resource representative must advice on the options available. If the HR representative advices that termination is the only option that is viable, the HR representative must advice on how to conduct the meeting. The advice includes the suitable language to use or to be avoided and the steps to be taken immediately after the termination. The other managers must be aware of the termination meeting at least 48 hours before the meeting. The manager must utilize this time to look into the organizational security to ensure that after dismissal, the employee will not be a threat to the organization. The manager must then consider a person to replace the employee after the termination to ensure the workload is taken care off (Employment law, 2014). Under the employment Act of 1999, an employee has a right to be accompanied to the meeting. The employee must take all measures to ensure they are present in the meeting. If for some reason the employee, employer or employee’s representative cannot make it to the meeting, the company must reschedule the meeting to a time and location that is convenient for all the parties involved. No decision can be made before the meeting. After the meeting takes place, the manager must give the employee the final decision and explain to the employee that he/ she has a right to appeal the decision made (Employment law, 2014). After the first meeting, the employee must inform the employer whether he/ she wishes to appeal. If the employee wishes to appeal, the employer must set another meeting and invite the employee and the employee representative. The employer at this stage must also be represented. The appeal meeting must take place before the dismissal has taken effect. The tribunal then investigates whether the appropriate steps were followed before the final decision is made. After the meeting is over, the manger should not communicate the employee’s termination to other employees outside the human resource department. Immediately after the laid off employee leaves the building, plans to replace him should be executed. The person chosen to take over the workload has to be informed immediately to ensure that everything is taken care off (Employment law, 2014). Determine the compensation that the fictitious company may provide to the separated employee. For a company that is dismissing collectively, there are specific rules that apply concerning the amount of money that the company is obliged to pay. There are the usual dismissal compensations that the company is required by law to pay and there are the extra closure premiums that a company has to pay. All the compensations are calculated based on the number of years the employee served the company. In the determination of a compensation package, there must be a distinction between white-collar and blue-collar employees. This is because they have different juridical statute. Therefore, their dismissal negotiations take place separately. The dismissal and closure compensation for the blue-collar worker is much smaller. The financial compensation enables the dismissed employees to come to terms with the termination and to give them enough time to look for a job. Apart from providing financial compensation, the employer may go ahead to secure employment for the employees, or at least some of them, in other companies (Kieselbach, 2009). An employer may have dismissed a former employee wrongfully, unlawfully or unfairly. In this case, the tribunal may order the employer to pay the employee the wages lost during the time between the dismissal and the reinstatement. The compensation may also be used to cover the time that a notice was supposed to have been issued but was not. The tribunal may vary the amount payable depending on the wrongdoing on the part of the employee. According to the FW act, before the amount of compensation is determined, some factors have to be taken into account. The most important factor is that they must consider the remuneration an employee would have received, or was likely to have received if he/ she had not been terminate. The compensation may be reduced by an appropriate amount due to any misconduct that led to the employee being terminated (Hor & Keats, 2009). Any reason for dismissal, whose grounds cannot be justified, is considered unlawful in court and gives rise to statutory compensation. For an individual to qualify for the unfair or unlawful dismissal compensation, the individual’s age must be less than the age set by the laws of the particular country and must have worked continuously for the same employer for a minimum period set by the laws of the country. This may also be applicable in cases where there is a signed agreement between employer and employee stating the amount of time the employee will work for the company before the probation is over and he/ she is hired as permanent staff. The age and loss of career prospect are factors included in the compensation of terminated employees. Predict three (3) ways that this layoff may affect the company. Some companies may choose to lay off employees using percentage layoffs per department. From the top management, this may seem viable. However, at the operational level, this is not a rational decision. This is because the type of job, the number of employees and the workload varies in different departments. This may lead to some departments being understaffed while others remaining overstaffed. If the problem facing a company is low sales, reducing the number of employees in the sales department will be counterproductive. A study conducted to find the effect of layoffs showed that companies who had layoffs of between three and ten percent of their workforce, there was no change in the share value. However, companies that had let go more than ten percent of their workforce had as much as 38 percent reduction in share value. Announcements about layoffs have overall negative effects on the value of stock prices, regardless of the country, the type of firm and the period. The irony is that these companies aiming to downsize end up being understaffed (Koller, 2010). Layoff of employees has devastating effects on the employees who survive the layoffs. A study was conducted on sample of over 10, 000 employees who represented the surviving employees. The study showed that these employees have lower perceptions on the organization’s performance and they are unsure of their job security. This is known as the survivor syndrome and if not dealt with, the company’s survival may be at risk. The employees may be angry, frustrated, sad or even feeling guilty that they were spared and others had to go. It is not surprising that these employees feel detached from the company and may have a desire to seek employment elsewhere. The overall effect of surviving syndrome is the reduced productivity. There is evidence showing that layoff of employees has very negative effects on the companies with the deepest cuts, as they suffer the most. An international company, Honeywell, lost most of its industrial base after it laid off a quarter of its employees. The larger the level of lay off, the lesser the chance of the company gaining any financial benefit. These days’ companies are taking layoff measures that are less drastic (Phillips & Gully, 2013). Layoffs alone cannot turnaround a company whose strategies are ineffective. It is very unfortunate that many layoffs are carried out for the sole purpose of improving financial performance. Layoffs should be carried out as a strategic initiative. Most of these organizations that have undertaken downsizing have not reported any increased productivity, efficiency or probability. In fact, some companies have reported decreased productivity and loss of profits. A study conducted showed that considerable costs result from unanticipated increases in voluntary turn over that follow layoffs. Post-downsizing turnover can be staggering. This is because on average, layoffs that reduce an employer’s workforce by one percent generally result in a 31 percent increase in voluntary post-downsizing turnover rates (Mello, 2014). ReferencesTop of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of FTop of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Brockner, J. (2010). A contemporary look at organizational justice: Multiplying insult times injury. New York: Routledge. Employment law in practice. (2014). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Harvard Business School. (2009). Laying off employees: Expert solutions to everyday challenges. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business Press. Hor, J., & Keats, L. (2009). Managing termination of employment. Sydney: CCH Australia. Kieselbach, T. (2009). Coping with occupational transitions: An empirical study with employees facing job loss in five European countries. Wiesbaden: VS, Verl. für Sozialwiss. Koller, F. (2010). Spark: How old-fashioned values drive a twenty-first-century corporation : lessons from Lincoln Electrics unique guaranteed employment program. New York: PublicAffairs. Mello, J. A. (2014). Strategic human resource management. United States: Cengage Learning. Noer, D. M. (2009). Healing the wounds: Overcoming the trauma of layoffs and revitalizing downsized organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Oreg, S., Michel, A., & By, R. T. (2013). The psychology of organizational change: Viewing change from the employees perspective. Phillips, J. M., & Gully, S. M. (2013). Human resource management. Mason, Ohio: South- Western Centage Learning.Bottom of Form Read More