Coronavirus redundancies are understandable, but there are alternatives
Redundancies can leave businesses ill-placed for revival, but real estate listings firm Domain is trying something more promising, argues Robyn Johns in this crossposting from The Conversation.
Redundancies are attractive to organisations in crisis. Although the payouts cost money upfront, they can reshape the remaining workforce to make it leaner and more fit for purpose.
On the other hand they can demoralise that workforce, and they are far from good for the rest of the economy.
Photo by Elliott Stallion on Unsplash
One alternative, available to the employers of as many as 6.6 million Australians for the next six months, is JobKeeper.
The only hope anyone has of a job is if companies remain profitable.
As for ‘in the not too distant future things will pick up’ – I doubt it. Change has come.
Most agencies will want more than 50% of their staff to remain working from home. The cost of offices, IT, insurances, fit-outs, food, beverages, stationary – you name it, is something only an employer can understand and frankly, the way of the future will make those costs luxuries, not a normal cost of business. The 30% – 40% add on costs per employee ( borne by an employer) over and above the cost of an employees salary have to go, or people have to go. That’s the new world we’re all be facing – best get used to it.
So what IS the cost of being ‘stationary’ when at home’.
The BIG issue in this is not trivial costs such as pens and paper, but insurance. If you are injured at work – but you were working at home – whose responsibility is it?
Leaner and more fit for purpose?
Agency staff are already working way more hours than contracted and there’s still fewer staff than needed…
The only thing attractive about redundancies are keeping the C suite paid up.