Layoffs: Based on seniority or performance?

[Ferocious]

Where I work we had the first ever layoff with 14 people being axed.

The company policy is based on layoffs by performance.

But after the list was announced....it became quite apparant to a lot of us that a lot of favoritism took place.

My views are now mixed on this subject.

Any thoughts?

 

[DurocShark]

Most companies are afraid of lawsuits due to favoritism (as you mentioned).

If it's a true performance selection, I'd much rather see performance.

If it's whoever the manager went to lunch with yesterday, I'd prefer seniority.

 

[Amused]

Welcome to the real world. As much as we'd like to think that people can be objective, they usually are not. Life is rarely, if ever fair.

I know I had a hard time coming to grips with this when I realized it. However, you are not going to change it. The best thing to do is learn how to live with it, and gain from it.

 

[Rapidskies]

It seems to me that salary comes into play as well. A larger company my wife works at went through major layoffs and the people that got the axe were the ones with the highest salary.

 

[jfall]

I have to face the same thing at work in the coming weeks. They have already told us they need to cut half of the 23 of us. Most of us all seem to already know how is going to be cut and who is going to stay, because there seems to be a circle of friends that the supervisor gets along with

 

[T2T III]

But after the list was announced....it became quite apparant to a lot of us that a lot of favoritism took place.

Unfortunately, politics will always be a major factor. When I was released a year ago, we received a whole booklet on the breakdown of those who were laid off - showing age, race, etc. -- to prevent any option of lawsuits being filed.

The only way to get away from a lot of the politics is to work for yourself.

 

[Spamela]

it's always political, & usually older workers with higher seniority (& pay) are over-represented.

 

[OutHouse]

At my company the layoffs have been based on the budget. Seniority or performance were not factors.

two months ago our Director in the IS dept got the ax. She has been with the company for 8 years and knows her stuff. She made too much money and was the first on on the list.

 

[Double Trouble]

In theory, using performance as the guide is the best route. Unfortunately, there's often no clear way to measure performance, and it starts boiling down to who is on better terms with those making the decision. Still, just because someone has managed to "hang around" for a long time does not mean they are the most productive employees and the most deserving of staying if job cuts are needed.

The idea of simply starting with those with the higher salaries is also pretty stupid, because those might also be your best people (which is why they might have gotten to the higher salaries to begin with). If the salary is an issue, I'd go to those people and say "if you're willing to take a pay cut, we'll keep you aboard, otherwise we can't afford your talent". At least give them a choice in the matter, and you might be able to keep some good people. Later on, when things get a little better in the economy, you can always bump them back up.....