Company Restructuring and Lay-Offs

Rooster

Today's Tom Sawyer
Damn Yankees
Joined
Aug 24, 2000
Messages
3,300
Likes
1
#1
This is kind of a flame but not flame enough to clutter up the Flame Forum, so I'll post it in here.

Our company decided to do some "restructuring" last week.

1) My boss gave up his title as VP of Operations
2) The title now belongs to a project manager we will call "Paul"

"Paul" immediately cuts hours in the warehouse and lays off one employee who has been with us for almost two years. "Paul"'s son, however who has only been with us for several months has been allowed to continue to work. Can anyone spell out the justification in that?

Sheesh, I guess seniority and merit no longer count if you have the same last name as a VP, huh?
 

Smit-Dog

Mi. Trail Riders
Joined
Oct 28, 2001
Messages
4,704
Likes
0
#2
I dislike nepotism about as much as seniority bias. I don't know any more particulars than what you posted, but the bottom line should always be about performance and value. Shouldn't matter who you know *or* how long you've been there.
 

Danman

Lifetime Sponsor
Joined
Nov 7, 2000
Messages
2,211
Likes
2
#3
I kind of agree with the Dog. Both workers being equal in workmanship I would keep the one that has more service. It should have nothing to do with who you know.
 

Patman

Pantless Wonder
Joined
Dec 26, 1999
Messages
19,774
Likes
0
#5
Everyone I hire is told up front and the in their performance review each year. "All pay adjustments and job security is strictly based on PERFORMANCE. If somebody comes in and out performs you they get a better adjustment and have more security." Seniority is a union biased criteria just as nepotisim is a family relationship based criteria. Neither has a place in a successful business plan.
 

Rooster

Today's Tom Sawyer
Damn Yankees
Joined
Aug 24, 2000
Messages
3,300
Likes
1
#6
Sorry - I left that part out, the guys son is lazy and calls in sick all the time, the guy that got the axe was a far better worker. This kid still has his job because of his last name, not because of performance or value.
 

WaltCMoto

Sponsoring Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2001
Messages
1,934
Likes
0
#7
Thats stinks. now your company has to deal with a slacker on top of loosing a good guy. In this economy, just be glad it wasnt you.
 

Patman

Pantless Wonder
Joined
Dec 26, 1999
Messages
19,774
Likes
0
#8
While the decision might have kept "the boss" with a happy home life but it will be a big negative at work. Obviously all the remaining work force is aware of the circumstances and this will play on people loyalty & respect to the company. Productivity will be effected in some form and this might just come back to bite the decision maker in the butt (I hope it does!). Maybe in the future things will show this stupidity and their two positions will need to be filled.
 
Last edited:

Dapper

Sponsoring Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
651
Likes
1
#9
There are 2 ways to go when you work for family. You take advantage or you bust your hump so people think you deserve the job and you don't want to disappoint your family. It's unfortunate that some people chose the "take advantage" route. It sucks when that happens. :|