Michelle Rodger: Don't forgetthe human touch when jobs axe falls

Published on Saturday 6 December 2008 13:37

IT HAS been a bleak year on the jobs front, but what is particularly upsetting is the pain and misery that lurks behind the headlines. Redundancy is traumatic and stressful for everyone concerned, employers and employees alike, but there appears to be deeper concern about the prolonged impact on our economy than about the impact on the individuals and families affected.

Some companies work hard to manage the redundancy process by protecting both those chosen to go (helping with CVs, interview technique training and time off for job hunting) and those "survivors" who are left behind to cope with changed work patterns, increased workloads, increased pressure, empty desks and all the associated guilt.

But making people redundant is probably one of the worst jobs in the world. I speak from painful experience. A week after my daughter was born I was back at work, baby in one hand and a bundle of P45s in the other. As a small business owner I had to tell a third of our workforce they had to go. It's not something I would ever want to repeat.

About 93% of Scottish firms employ fewer than 10 people, and if they're forced to make someone redundant they don't do so lightly. A lack of in-house human resources capability means that SMEs rely heavily on guidance from sources such as the Federation of Small Businesses, trade associations and accountants to make sure they comply with regulation. It's costly and time-consuming for a business that is, by the very fact that it's making people redundant, struggling to make ends meet.

Acas figures reveal that the number of firms and workers seeking advice on redundancies and layoffs reached a six-month high last month. Almost a third of the 60,000 calls to the Acas helpline in November were about redundancy, an increase of 12% since May. The Acas website received 15,000 visits a week in November, compared with 4,000 earlier in the year, a 300% increase. Calls were mainly about legal responsibilities, consultation periods and how to decide which workers to make redundant.

But the available advice tends to be objective, clinical, and process and legislation-driven. The emotional factor is sadly missing.

I understand legislation and independent advisers are essential to protect employers and employees, but I'm not convinced that employment law is flexible enough to allow the employer to make the right decision. Sure, it sets out guidelines and processes and formats and systems to make victim selection easier, but it clearly doesn't allow for the human touch.

How does it take into account the single mum who has worked her socks off to bring up her two sons? And what about the guy whose wife has just had a baby and they've moved to a bigger house with a bigger mortgage? And what happens if, as is all too common in small businesses, you've got close friends and members of your family working for you? How can the system take this into account?

Following the letter of the law is important. I wouldn't encourage anyone to break the rules, but it's vital not to lose sight of the bigger picture: the business goals, not least of all its survival, your own aspirational goals, your people and the way you treat them – both those that go and those that stay. Your integrity as an employer, the respect of your employees and the ultimate success of your business depend on it.