Rounds of redundancies and layoffs have for decades been an effective way of easing out low performers and closing down locations with current or future issues. Those location issues might be financial, geographical, skill availability.
Yup - saw it happened a plenty during the GFC. Get rid of the poor performers, the too highly paid (when a younger executive can do the job on lower pay) and unfortunately, those not politically (office) aligned to those in charge.
Yup - saw it happened a plenty during the GFC. Get rid of the poor performers, the too highly paid (when a younger executive can do the job on lower pay) and unfortunately, those not politically (office) aligned to those in charge.
Sounds as though Winner69's great diversity manual is being thrown out the window.?.!
No PERCY ...they using the manual ......replacing old past it white guys with young people of mixed genders, races etc is good.
And that sums up why turn- arounds and restructures take longer and cost more.
All the old past it guys had all the knowledge and experience of the business.
And that sums up why turn- arounds and restructures take longer and cost more.
All the old past it guys had all the knowledge and experience of the business.
And that sums up why turn- arounds and restructures take longer and cost more.
All the old past it guys had all the knowledge and experience of the business.
Agree Percy,
Change for the sake of diversity etc etc is a modern nonsense. Basic common sense dictates that the best person for the job always should get the job - period.
-dodgy
Bookmarks