Jump to content

User:Jwk53/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article Evaluation: Layoff[edit]

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference?

Yes, each fact presented on the wiki page Layoff has a proper and reliable source and sufficient subscripts indicating and linking to the source.

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

The least relevant parts of the wiki page seem to be the references to other country’s other than the U.S. Although this page falls under the same language, English, the many countries’ mentioned and referenced to layoffs seems to distract the reader from the foundation of American layoff policy’s. If the writer wanted to contribute other English speaking countries and their layoff policy’s, they should have individually described their policy’s instead of weaving American and European countries together.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

Yes, the article is neutral for the most part despite the fact that there is a section at the bottom of the article named “Unemployment compensation in Australia”, Australia’s layoff policy shouldn’t have received a separate section. The facts presented show no bias and clearly portrays events that have been derived from the references. The article tries to explain the point of view of many countries layoff policy.

Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

No, the articles used in this article are unbiased. References include European, American and state and local agencies statistics websites that sole purpose is to present factual evidence without a bias opinion.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

Yes, America is not at the forefront of the article. It seems the writer was interested in layoffs policy’s abroad rather than in the U.S. In the article, the UK, Britain and Australia are overrepresented with layoff policy’s. The United States should have been the primary focus on layoffs with minor references to other countries to show a contrast.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article?

Yes, the articles citations work and from reading the article and comparing them to the references given, the writer(s) used direct quotations instead of rewording the information into their own words to display the information they obtained.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

Yes, many of the information is a decade old and doesn’t properly reflect the nature of layoffs today. Some information even coming from the 1990’s. Despite this, there are some recent information that is up to date but overall the information appears to be outdated.

Annotated bibliography[edit]

1.    1975. "LAST HIRED, FIRST FIRED LAYOFFS AND TITLE VII." Harvard Law Review 88, no. 7: 1544.

This article describes the basis in which employers are laid off of work. The article explains that many African American workers in America struggle to gain seniority within their job. The the layoff procedures in America typically layoff the last employees that were hired and/or people of lower position and hierarchy in the company.

2.    Allan, Peter. 1997. "Minimizing employee layoffs while downsizing: Employer practices that work." International Journal Of Manpower 18, no. 7/8: 576.

Some employers have resisted the temptation to reduce costs through massive layoffs, believing that it is more advantageous to retain their employees than to terminate them. These employers have managed to minimize or even prevent layoffs by using a variety of strategies. Describes some widely used strategies and provides examples of companies that have implemented them successfully.

3.    Chavaillaz, Alain, David Wastell, & Jürgen Sauer. 2016. "Effects of extended layoff periods on performance and operator trust under adaptable automation." Applied Ergonomics 53, 241-251.

This article regarding the consequences of extended layoffs argues that when employees are not required to use their learned skills for long periods of time, that their skill level dramatically decreases, due to lack of practice. The the length at which an employee is laid off from work, the higher chances they are to complete the task slower, less efficient way. Chavaillaz explains this is due in part to automation of jobs. The job functions and skills required for many jobs have evolved from a physical based work flow to more instruction manual based tasks.

4.    Hyman, J. (2016). A Humane Approach to Layoffs. Workforce, 95(8), 20.

Jon Hyman explain in this article the inhumane nature at which company’s lay off employees without regard to the aftermath effects to the person. Jon believes that company’s disregard employees like trash. Not worrying about the persons future or stability while they try to downsize their company. He gave a list of recommendations to employers to use to help the transition of laid off employees more smooth. First is “Over communicate with all your employees.” This means employees should give at least 2 week notice from the layoff, allowing for a job replacement. Second is, “Treat everyone equitably” meaning employees shouldn’t base the layoff on the most recent job performance report but should evaluate the past performance to determine the correct persons to lay off. Third is , “Help people find jobs”, employees should work with the future layoff to five recommendations and job advice to help the employee succeed. Last, “Don’t toss people out onto the street”, giving the employee respect and not treat the like they did something wrong to be laid off.

5. Moore, Sarah, Leon Grunberg, and Edward Greenberg. 2006. "Surviving repeated waves of organizational downsizing: The regency, duration, and order effects associated with different forms of layoff contact." Anxiety, Stress & Coping 19, no. 3: 309-329.

Using data only from workers who experienced indirect or direct layoff contact at each time period, we found some evidence that recent direct experiences were associated with significant group differences for intent to quit and depression. There was also some evidence to suggest that a single direct layoff experience still affected workerś levels of job security, even when this experience occurred some six years previous to the Time 3 measurement. The largest within group changes in scores over time were typically found among workers experiencing an indirect followed by a direct experience, suggesting that the order of events impacted worker job security, intent to quit, and depression. For workers experiencing back-to-back direct downsizing, the rate of decline slowed, significantly so, for depression.

Project Proposal: Layoff (revised)[edit]

Alpha Wiki 8

Brandon Elliott: brandon.elliott

Jordan Khalil: jwk53

Kayla Stubbs: kls216

Project Proposal: Layoff (revisions)

11/14/16

The following bolded titles are from the Layoff wiki page:

  • Introduction: (Kayla)
    • Keep: We like the meat of this section but definitely needs to be rewritten. It is helpful to have the basic definition available.
    • Remove: Research on downsizing regarding management, cutting costs, and organizational improvement in the UK and Japan. We want to focus on American Layoffs
    • Add: We want to narrow our focus on American Layoffs with North American based policies rather than sporadically giving a global stance of layoffs.
  • Terminology: (Jordan and Kayla)
    • Keep: the euphemisms are used to soften a blow
    • Remove: redundancy- a specific legal term in the UK Labour law. “In (French speaking) Belgium the term ‘Procedure Enault’ has become a synonym for the consultation process leading to mass redundancies, due to a controversial mass layoff and resultant legislation in the late 1990s.”
  • Common Abbreviations for Reduction in Force: - (Jordan Khalil)
    • Keep: all the existing abbreviations
    • Add: how employers determine the appropriate abbreviation to use, depending on the specific circumstance.
      • RIF - Reduction in Force
        • of undetermined method. Often pronounced like the word riff rather than spelled out. Sometimes used as a verb, as in "the employees were pretty heavily riffed".
      • eRIF
        • Circumstance: Layoff notice by email.
      • IRIF - Involuntary reduction in force -
        • Circumstance: The employee(s) did not voluntarily choose to leave the company. This usually implies that the method of reduction involved either layoffs, firings, or both, but would not usually imply resignations or retirements. If the employee is fired rather than laid off, the term "with cause" may be appended to indicate that the separation was due to this employee's performance and/or behavior, rather than being financially motivated.
      • VRIF - Voluntary reduction in force -
        • Circumstance: The employee(s) did play a role in choosing to leave the company, most likely through resignation or retirement. In some instances, a company may exert pressure on an employee to make this choice, perhaps by implying that a layoff or termination would otherwise be imminent, or by offering an attractive severance or early retirement package.
      • WFR - Work force reduction.
  • Unemployment Compensation: (Brandon)
    • Paragraph 1:
      • Keep: The first four sentences of this paragraph.
      • Remove: The examples from France since we are narrowing the focus to North America.
    • Paragraph 2:
      • Keep: This is a well written paragraph and we plan on keeping this information.
      • Add: more information on involuntary termination separation packages and how certain packages are offered with a mass layoff, versus a different package if you voluntarily leave. We will also go into detail about  severance package details that are offered at different levels within an organization. ( ex. Regional manager vs warehouse worker)
    • Paragraph 3:
      • Remove: this entire paragraph is unnecessary.
    • Paragraph 4:
      • Remove: The entire paragraph will be deleted
    • Paragraph 5:
      • Keep: The meat of this paragraph is good. We want to make the effects of layoffs its own section because it is important  and we would like to go into more details and expand this subject.
      • Remove: We want to change the spelling to American English ( Labour to labor… etc) since we are focusing on North America and America.
  • Unemployment Compensation in Australia:

Adding new section to the article Layoff:

- Layoffs in the public sector

    • Remove:  This entire section is going to be deleted.

Adding new sections to the article Layoff:

  • Effects of Layoffs:
    • Effects of layoffs in the workplace - Kayla Stubbs
      • Layoffs have remained the greatest way for a company to cut costs. Although for the company layoffs might be good, it could put a dark cloud over employees heads, and lower their motivation knowing they could be fired soon
    • Effects of layoffs to the employee - Jordan Khalil
      • Employees (or former employees in this case) can be affected in a couple of different ways. When an employee is laid off his or her general trust in long-term work may decrease, reducing expectations upon rehire.
    • Effects of layoffs in the American Economy- Brandon Elliott
      • Layoffs create lower job security overall, and an increased competitiveness for available and opening positions.

Work Plan:

  • Group Meeting Time: Thursday @ 6:00-8:00pm
  • Method: Google Doc and then publishing on Jordan’s sandbox

Kayla

    • Introduction
    • Part of the section,Terminology, shared with Jordan

Brandon

    • Unemployment Compensation
    • Effects of layoffs in the American Economy

Jordan

    • Common Abbreviations for Reduction in Force
    • Part of the section, Terminology, shared with Kayla
      • Adding new section: Layoffs in the public sector and how it effects the private sector

Initial Revisions 11/21/16[edit]

Introduction[edit]

A layoff [1]is the temporary suspension or permanent termination of employment of an employee or, more commonly, a group of employees (collective layoff)[2] for business reasons, such as personnel management or downsizing an organization.

Originally, layoff referred exclusively to a temporary interruption in work, or employment, but this has evolved to a permanent elimination of a position in both British and US English,[1] requiring the addition of "temporary" to specify the original meaning of the word. A layoff is not to be confused with wrongful termination.

Laid off workers or displaced workers are workers who have lost or left their jobs because their employer has closed or moved, there was insufficient work for them to do, or their position or shift was abolished (Borbely, 2011).[3][4]

Downsizing in a company is defined to involve the reduction of employees in a workforce. Downsizing in companies became a popular practice in the 1980s and early 1990s as it was seen as a way to deliver better shareholder value as it helps to reduce the costs of employers (downsizing, 2015). Indeed, recent research on downsizing in the U.S.,[5] UK,[6] and Japan[7][8] suggests that downsizing is being regarded by management as one of the preferred routes to help declining organizations, cutting unnecessary costs, and improve organizational performance.[9] Usually a layoff occurs as a cost-cutting measure.

Contents[edit]

null hide 

Terminology[edit]

Euphemisms are often used to "soften the blow" in the process of firing and being fired.[10]The term "layoff" originally meant a temporary interruption in work (and usually pay). The term became a euphemism for permanent termination of employment and now usually means that, requiring the addition of "temporary" to refer to the original meaning. Many other euphemisms have been coined for "(permanent) layoff", including "downsizing", "excess reduction", "rightsizing", "leveraging synergies", "delayering", "smartsizing", "redeployment", "workforce reduction", "workforce optimization", "simplification", "force shaping", "recussion", and "reduction in force" (also called "RIF", especially in the government employment sector).

"Mass layoff" is defined by the United States Department of Labor as 50 or more workers laid off from the same company around the same time. "Attrition" implies that positions will be eliminated as workers quit or retire. "Early retirement" means workers may quit now yet still remain eligible for their retirement benefits later. While "redundancy" is a specific legal term in UK labour law. When an employer is faced with work of a particular type ceasing or diminishing at a particular location,[11] it may be perceived[by whom?] as obfuscation. Firingsimply misconduct or failure while layoffs imply economic forces beyond the employer's and employees' control, especially in the face of a recession such as the one that began in the late 2000s.

Common Abbreviations for Reduction in Force[edit]

RIF - A generic reduction in force, of undetermined method. Often pronounced like the word riff rather than spelled out. Sometimes used as a verb, as in "the employees were pretty heavily riffed".

eRIF – Layoff notice by email.

IRIF - Involuntary reduction in force - The employee(s) did not voluntarily choose to leave the company. This usually implies that the method of reduction involved either layoffs, firings, or both, but would not usually imply resignations or retirements. If the employee is fired rather than laid off, the term "with cause" may be appended to indicate that the separation was due to this employee's performance and/or behavior, rather than being financially motivated.

VRIF - Voluntary reduction in force - The employee(s) did play a role in choosing to leave the company, most likely through resignation or retirement. In some instances, a company may exert pressure on an employee to make this choice, perhaps by implying that a layoff or termination would otherwise be imminent, or by offering an attractive severance or early retirement package.

WFR - Work force reduction.

Layoffs in the Public Sector[edit]

Following the recession of 2007-2008, the public sector has seen significantly smaller job growth in employment versus the private sector. As the public sector declines the demand for services from the private sector decline as well. Layoffs in the public sector have put limitations on the growth rate of the private sector, inevitably burdening the entire flow of markets.

Unemployment Compensation[edit]

The risk of being laid off varies depending on the workplace and country a person is working in. Unemployment compensation in any country or workplace is a function which has two main factors. The first factor of unemployment compensation depends on the distribution of unemployment benefits in a workplace outlined in an employee handbook. The second factor is the risk of inequality being conditioned upon the political regime type in the country an employee is working in (Wonik, 2010).[12] For example, in Canada, Dorion (1995) states that white-collar workers who have been made redunant receive higher re-employment wages, than those in blue-collar occupations as there job is regarded as being of a higher status than blue collar workers. The amount of compensation will usually depend on what level the employee holds in the company. Packages may also vary if the employee is laid off, or voluntarily quits in the face of a layoff (VRIF).

The method of separation may have an effect on a former employee's ability to collect whatever form of unemployment compensation might be available in their jurisdiction. In many U.S. states, workers who are laid off can file an unemployment claim and receive compensation. Depending on local or state laws, workers who leave voluntarily are generally ineligible to collect unemployment benefits, as are those who are fired for gross misconduct. Also, lay-offs due to a firm's moving production overseas may entitle one to increased re-training benefits. Some companies in the United States utilize Supplemental Unemployment Benefits (Lihzis, 2016).[14] Since they were first introduced by organized labor and the Department of Labor in the early 1950s, and first issued in a Revenue Ruling by the IRS in 1956, SUB-Pay Plans[15] have enabled employers to supplement the receipt of state unemployment insurance benefits for employees that experience an involuntary layoff. By establishing severance payments as SUB-Pay benefits, the payments are not considered wages for FICA, FUTA, and SUI tax purposes, and employee FICA tax. To qualify for SUB-Pay benefits, the participant must be eligible for state unemployment insurance benefits and the separation benefit must be paid on a periodic basis.

There have also been increasing concerns about the organizational effectiveness of the post-downsized ‘anorexic organization’. The benefits, which organizations claim to be seeking from downsizing, center on savings in labor costs, speedier decision making, better communication, reduced product development time, enhanced involvement of employees and greater responsiveness to customers (De Meuse et al. 1997, p. 168). However, some writers draw attention to the ‘obsessive’ pursuit of downsizing to the point of self-starvation marked by excessive cost cutting, organ failure and an extreme pathological fear of becoming inefficient. Hence ‘trimming’ and ‘tightening belts’ are the order of the day (Tyler and Wilkinson 2007)

Effects of Layoffs[edit]

Traditionally, layoffs directly affect the employee, however the employee terminated is not alone in this. Layoffs affect the workplace environment and the economy as well a the employee. Layoffs have a widespread effect and the three main components of layoff effects are in the workplace, to the employee, and effects to the economy.

Effects of layoffs in the workplace:

Layoffs have remained the greatest way for a company to cut costs. Although from the employer's perspective a layoff is beneficial for the business, layoffs create an uncertainty in the workplace environment and lowers other employees' job security as well as creates an apprehension and fear of termination for the remaining employees, and subsequently lowers overall motivation in the workplace environment.

According to Healing the Wounds: Overcoming the trauma of Layoffs and Revitalizing Downsized Organizations, in the post-layoff environment, there is a need for empathy, tangibility, self-knowledge, and relentlessly seeking customers among the surviving employees. The remaining employees may have feelings of survivors guilt. Optimism is critical for rebuilding the workplace environment because employees look to their leaders for stability and predictability. No matter the position in an organization, employees will look for job security.

Effects of layoffs to the employee:

Employees (or former employees in this case) can be affected in a couple of different ways. When an employee is laid off his or her general trust in long-term work may decrease, reducing expectations upon rehire.

After an employee withstands a layoff, the effects can trickle into future employment and attitudes. Layoffs in the workplace often leave the former employer less inclined to trust future employers which can lead to behavioral conflicts among co-workers and management. Despite new employers not being responsible for a prior circumstances, job performance may still be affected by incoming employers. Many comedies work to make layoffs as minimally burdensome to the employee. at times employers may layoff multiple people at once to soften the impact.

Effects of layoffs in the American Economy:

Layoffs create lower job security overall, and an increased competitiveness for available and opening positions. Layoffs have generally two major effects on ecomomy and stockholders. The way layoffs affect the economy varies from the industry that is doing the layoffs and the size of the layoff. If an industry that employs a majority of a region (freight in the northeast for example) suffers and has to lay employees off,there will be mass unemployment in an economically rich area. This can have leave ripple effects nation-wide. Unemployment is the biggest effect on the economy that can come from layoffs..

Layoffs Abroad[edit]

In (French speaking) Belgium the term Procédure Renault has become a synonym for the consultation process leading to mass redundancies, due to a controversial mass layoff and resultant legislation in the late 1990s.

When an employee has been laid off in Australia their employer has to give them redundancy pay, which is also known as severance pay. The only time that a redundancy payment doesn’t have to be paid is if an employee is casual, working for a small business or has worked for a business for less than twelve months. The redundancy compensation payment for employees depends on the length of time an employee has worked for an employer which excludes unpaid leave.

If an employer can’t afford the redundancy payment they are supposed to give their employee, once making them redundant, or they find their employee another job that is suitable for the employee. An employer is able to apply for a reduction in the amount of money they have to pay the employee they have made redundant. An employer can do this by applying to the Fair Work Commission for a redundancy payment reduction (Redundancy - Fair Work Ombudsman, 2016).[16]

A layoff is also known as a retrenchment in (South African English). In the UK, permanent termination due to elimination of a position is usually called redundancy.[2]

Certain countries (such as Belgium, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Italy, France and Germany), distinguish between leaving the company of one's own free will, in which case the person is not entitled to unemployment benefits, but may receive a onetime paymentand leaving a company as part of a reduction in labour force size, in which case the person is entitled to them. A RIF reduces the number of positions, rather than laying off specific people, and is usually accompanied by internal redeployment.

References[edit]

  1. ^ Baumol, W. J., Blinder, A. S. & Wolff, E. N. (2003). Downsizing in America: Reality, Causes and Consequences. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. See also the American Management Association annual surveys since 1990.
  2. ^ Sahdev et al. 1999; Chorely 2002; Mason 2002; Rogers 2002
  3. ^ Mroczkowski, T. and Hanaoka, M. (1997), ‘Effective downsizing strategies in Japan and America: is there a convergence of employment practices?’, Academy of Management Review, Vol.22, No.1, pp. 226–56.
  4. ^ Ahmakjian and Robinson 2001
  5. ^ Mellahi, K. and Wilkinson, A. (2004) Downsizing and Innovation Output: A Review of Literature and Research Propositions, BAM Paper 2004, British Academy of Management.
  6. ^ (Wilkinson 2005, Redman and Wilkinson, 2006)
  7. ^ [1] Archived June 10, 2011, at the Wayback Machine.

Further Reading[edit]

  • Karlsson, Tobias (2013). The dynamics of downsizing: the Swedish Tobacco Monopoly in the 1920s. Enterprise & Society, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 829-853.
  • Krolikowski, Pawel. Job ladders and earnings of displaced workers (Feb. 2015), Center for Economic and Policy Research. "Workers who suffer job displacement experience surprisingly large and persistent earnings losses. However, standard labour market models fail to explain such a phenomenon. This column explains the persistence of workers’ earnings losses by arguing that displaced workers face higher separation probabilities in new jobs, and take substantial time to find their ideal job. The framework also matches empirical findings on the shares of average earnings losses following displacement that are due to reduced employment and lower wages."
  • Weinstein, Bruce, "Downsizing 101", BusinessWeek magazine, September 12, 2008.
  • Cameron KS. 1(994) Strategies for successful organizational downsizing. Human Resource Management, 33: 477-500.
  • Cascio, F.W. (2002) ‘Strategies for responsible restructuring’, Academy of Management Executive, Vol.16, pp. 80–91.
  • Redman T and Wilkinson A (2006) Downsizing, in T. Redman and A. Wilkinson(eds), Contemporary Human Resource Management, London: FT/Prentice Hall, pp. 356–381
  • Sahdev, K. (2003) ‘Survivors’ reactions to downsizing: the importance Human Resource Management Journal, Vol.13, No.4, pp. 56–74.
  • Tyler M and Wilkinson A (2007) The Tyranny of Corporate Slenderness: Understanding Organizations Anorexically, Work, Employment and Society, 21: 537-549.

See Also[edit]

External Links[edit]

Look up layoff in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jwk53/sandbox&oldid=753352874"