in 90 minutes have a 50% chance of being out of a job

[manilaseagull]

he might not be, whereas you clearly are.....

I might be a twat but I have a job.

When it comes to redundancies/retrenchment/sackings call it what you want,

A company WILL not get rid of a good performer, it is chance to thin out the dead wood.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

A company WILL not get rid of a good performer, it is chance to thin out the dead wood.

Sorry, but that is simply rubbish - if you have to make cuts, you may have no choice. Of course, there may be some underachievers that you can get rid of, but most certainly that is not always the case.

 

[Knotty]

I might be a twat but I have a job.

When it comes to redundancies/retrenchment/sackings call it what you want,

A company WILL not get rid of a good performer, it is chance to thin out the dead wood.

Complete NONSENSE.

I once had to make six members of staff redundant in one day and four of them were excellent at their jobs.

Their redundancy was nothing to do with their abilities and it was one of the toughest days in my life...but I had no choice.

Please think before you much such ridiculous statements.

 

[maffew]

I might be a twat but I have a job.

When it comes to redundancies/retrenchment/sackings call it what you want,

A company WILL not get rid of a good performer, it is chance to thin out the dead wood.

thats possibly the stupidest/most ignorant post I've ever read on here and thats saying something

 

[manilaseagull]

Its a chance to get rid of staff who are not good workers/timekeepers/performers/ don't like company rules, no promotion prospects...etc

When it comes to simply cutting numbers someone is always going to be better than the next guy, NO ONE is safe...

I am just questioning why the said guy was made redundant twice in a year.

It maybe bad luck on 2 occasions but I doubt it.

 

[Gwylan]

Complete NONSENSE.

I once had to make six members of staff redundant in one day and four of them were excellent at their jobs.

Their redundancy was nothing to do with their abilities and it was one of the toughest days in my life...but I had no choice.

Please think before you much such ridiculous statements.

Too right - that was a ridiculous statement by manilaseagull.

I once had to make someone redundant before she started - the parent company pulled the funding before her first day (and that was the toughest call I've ever had to do at work). How on earth could someone who's not even started her job possibly be described as "dead wood"?

 

[manilaseagull]

Complete NONSENSE.

I once had to make six members of staff redundant in one day and four of them were excellent at their jobs.

Their redundancy was nothing to do with their abilities and it was one of the toughest days in my life...but I had no choice.

Please think before you much such ridiculous statements.

So who did you chose and why did you chose them?

YOU WOULD NOT HAVE CHOSEN WHOEVER WAS BEST AT THEIR JOB...if you did....well.......................................

 

[maffew]

Its a chance to get rid of staff who are not good workers/timekeepers/performers/ don't like company rules, no promotion prospects...etc

When it comes to simply cutting numbers someone is always going to be better than the next guy, NO ONE is safe...

I am just questioning why the said guy was made redundant twice in a year.

It maybe bad luck on 2 occasions but I doubt it.

its different to getting the sack

a lot of companys do last in first out anyway

 

[manilaseagull]

Too right - that was a ridiculous statement by manilaseagull.

I once had to make someone redundant before she started - the parent company pulled the funding before her first day (and that was the toughest call I've ever had to do at work). How on earth could someone who's not even started her job possibly be described as "dead wood"?

Its called no more budget no longer required..

if she had not started its hardly being made redundant is it ?

 

[User removed 4]

Its a chance to get rid of staff who are not good workers/timekeepers/performers/ don't like company rules, no promotion prospects...etc

When it comes to simply cutting numbers someone is always going to be better than the next guy, NO ONE is safe...

I am just questioning why the said guy was made redundant twice in a year.

It maybe bad luck on 2 occasions but I doubt it.

Why did you have to go all the way to manila to find a job/girlfriend? Is it becuse you're a twat ?

 

[Knotty]

Its a chance to get rid of staff who are not good workers/timekeepers/performers/ don't like company rules, no promotion prospects...etc

When it comes to simply cutting numbers someone is always going to be better than the next guy, NO ONE is safe...

I am just questioning why the said guy was made redundant twice in a year.

It maybe bad luck on 2 occasions but I doubt it.

Again you make unfair generalisations.

Soemtimes reduncy is not about choosing between two people; sometimes, as I know, it is about a single job function no longer being needed.

 

[manilaseagull]

Why did you have to go all the way to manila to find a job/girlfriend? Is it becuse you're a twat ?

No Because after 30 years in the RAF I wanted a change..

Learn to spell please.

Manila starts with a capital M

Is it half term..?

Tootle pip must go its 17:30

 

[User removed 4]

No Because after 30 years in the RAF I wanted a change..

Learn to spell please.

Manila starts with a capital M

Is it half term..?

Tootle pip must go its 17:30

You couldn't get a bird here you mean learn to spell please ,it's toodle pip

 

[manilaseagull]

Again you make unfair generalisations.

Soemtimes reduncy is not about choosing between two people; sometimes, as I know, it is about a single job function no longer being needed.

So you are released? Do you expect a company who is in the business of making money to keep you overborne and pay excess wages?

Its called business

 

[Gwylan]

if she had not started its hardly being made redundant is it ?

You really are revealing your ignorance now. People aren't really made redundant their positions are. It was decided that we would no longer fill that position so, yes, legally, she was made redundant (because her position was).

It's a distinction that matters to Social Security as if you leave a job voluntarily or you're fired, you're limited in what you can claim while if you've made redundant, you're not.

 

[maffew]

No Because after 30 years in the RAF I wanted a change..

Learn to spell please

So who did you chose and why did you chose them?

YOU WOULD NOT HAVE CHOSEN WHOEVER WAS BEST AT THEIR JOB...if you did....well.......................................

Its choose not chose. Learn to spell yourself.

 

[The Spanish]

So who did you chose and why did you chose them?

YOU WOULD NOT HAVE CHOSEN WHOEVER WAS BEST AT THEIR JOB...if you did....well.......................................

absolute crap and you know it. I have seen countless good people go and f***ing idiots stay as they are 20 - odd years in and pensioned up to their eyeballs and they cannot afford to get rid of the cnts. That is the the general rule, nothing to do with merit but costs.

 

[Knotty]

So who did you chose and why did you chose them?

YOU WOULD NOT HAVE CHOSEN WHOEVER WAS BEST AT THEIR JOB...if you did....well.......................................

Yes in some cases they were not the best at the job, but they were still very, very good. That's far from being 'dead wood' as you said earlier. And a couple of them had no competition for the job, they were the only ones doing their particular job and those job functions were, sadly, no longer required.

Your comments are very demeaning and disrespectful to tens of thousands of people who have done nothing to deserve losing their jobs.

 

[The Spanish]

So you are released? Do you expect a company who is in the business of making money to keep you overborne and pay excess wages?

Its called business

business lectures from the Philippines! f***ing hell. Its like watching a Road Safety Video from France.

 

[Knotty]

So you are released? Do you expect a company who is in the business of making money to keep you overborne and pay excess wages?

Its called business

I agree with all of that, but that is totally different to the point you made earlier - a point which I and others totally disagree with.