Hi Shwetha,
It's a good topic you have raised.
We call ourselves as Strategic Partners, and in this situation, you blame the company. I don't agree with you all. Is it that you just want to convince yourselves and say you are a strategic partner when you actually restrict yourselves from not going deep into the fact and analyzing the strategy of the top management?
If the company feels that it can no longer bear the expenses of manpower, it surely makes a good decision.
Let aside our soft-natured humanity as an HR professional, but be practical. If the company has no enough funds, do you think you can survive in the market by paying salaries to employees with no Return On Investment?
Why do you deny the fact that even employees cold-heartedly ditch the company and go to competitors for better perks? Why are you feeling bad if the reverse is happening to them? Take it in a positive way. Just spread a rumor that the company is not profitable, and you will see by the next payroll, you would be calculating final settlements for at least 50% of the employees.
Yes, I admit that it's recruitment costs, but that should be planned well in advance, backed by good mid and senior-level management strategy.
I hope I have not hurt the feelings of my friends and am being more practical. You will understand this concept when you work for Small & Medium enterprises, where the management struggles to bear even simple overheads like staff parties, picnics, or even administration costs like visiting cards. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I want Shwetha to reply to me.
Thanks, Shahed
Dear Friends,
You all are aware that these days lots of companies are cutting the manpower to do some cost-cutting.
I would like to raise the question, "Is this the good HR practice to hire first and then fire?" Companies are asking for the resignation even if the employee is meeting the expectations or making the working unfavorable so that employees themselves leave.
My own company is doing the same. Recently, our HR head said that we are not going to retain anybody, and after every resignation, we will celebrate - jokingly. But still, I was wondering if this is a final call, then why do we work hard on the recruitments, selecting the right person? Our management goes for excess manpower. We had the manpower of more than 1500 employees, but in the last six months, only 600 employees are left, and also in most of the exit forms, they have mentioned that they are forced to leave.
I would like you all to shed some light on it as aren't we playing with employees' future?
Expecting to see a few views on it.
Thanks,
Shweta Jaitly
From Qatar, Doha
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
2It's a good topic you have raised.
We call ourselves as Strategic Partners, and in this situation, you blame the company. I don't agree with you all. Is it that you just want to convince yourselves and say you are a strategic partner when you actually restrict yourselves from not going deep into the fact and analyzing the strategy of the top management?
If the company feels that it can no longer bear the expenses of manpower, it surely makes a good decision.
Let aside our soft-natured humanity as an HR professional, but be practical. If the company has no enough funds, do you think you can survive in the market by paying salaries to employees with no Return On Investment?
Why do you deny the fact that even employees cold-heartedly ditch the company and go to competitors for better perks? Why are you feeling bad if the reverse is happening to them? Take it in a positive way. Just spread a rumor that the company is not profitable, and you will see by the next payroll, you would be calculating final settlements for at least 50% of the employees.
Yes, I admit that it's recruitment costs, but that should be planned well in advance, backed by good mid and senior-level management strategy.
I hope I have not hurt the feelings of my friends and am being more practical. You will understand this concept when you work for Small & Medium enterprises, where the management struggles to bear even simple overheads like staff parties, picnics, or even administration costs like visiting cards. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I want Shwetha to reply to me.
Thanks, Shahed
Dear Friends,
You all are aware that these days lots of companies are cutting the manpower to do some cost-cutting.
I would like to raise the question, "Is this the good HR practice to hire first and then fire?" Companies are asking for the resignation even if the employee is meeting the expectations or making the working unfavorable so that employees themselves leave.
My own company is doing the same. Recently, our HR head said that we are not going to retain anybody, and after every resignation, we will celebrate - jokingly. But still, I was wondering if this is a final call, then why do we work hard on the recruitments, selecting the right person? Our management goes for excess manpower. We had the manpower of more than 1500 employees, but in the last six months, only 600 employees are left, and also in most of the exit forms, they have mentioned that they are forced to leave.
I would like you all to shed some light on it as aren't we playing with employees' future?
Expecting to see a few views on it.
Thanks,
Shweta Jaitly
From Qatar, Doha
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Shweta,
This is a very burning issue. We need to take it very seriously.
Before letting employees go, every employer commonly cites the following reasons:
1. Your performance level is very poor.
Here is my question to all the HR people: If they are not performing well, why did you hire them in your organization? Is your selection process flawed? If not, then you are not a perfect selector, and you should also be let go along with those employees.
I am not criticizing HR. Many MNCs have multiple rounds of interviews, yet subpar candidates still manage to enter the organization.
As mentioned earlier, one of our HR personnel, Mr. Bee, asks: Why can't we hire highly talented individuals during recruitment? Skilled individuals can perform the work of two average employees, leading to a 1:2 productivity ratio.
In conclusion, I want to urge all HR professionals to either not use the above reasons when letting employees go or to recruit skilled manpower.
As an HR professional, I should not criticize other HR professionals. Please do not take this the wrong way, but if you disagree with my perspective, feel free to share your thoughts. As a newcomer, I have a lot to learn from experienced individuals like you.
Thanks & Regards,
Uday
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This is a very burning issue. We need to take it very seriously.
Before letting employees go, every employer commonly cites the following reasons:
1. Your performance level is very poor.
Here is my question to all the HR people: If they are not performing well, why did you hire them in your organization? Is your selection process flawed? If not, then you are not a perfect selector, and you should also be let go along with those employees.
I am not criticizing HR. Many MNCs have multiple rounds of interviews, yet subpar candidates still manage to enter the organization.
As mentioned earlier, one of our HR personnel, Mr. Bee, asks: Why can't we hire highly talented individuals during recruitment? Skilled individuals can perform the work of two average employees, leading to a 1:2 productivity ratio.
In conclusion, I want to urge all HR professionals to either not use the above reasons when letting employees go or to recruit skilled manpower.
As an HR professional, I should not criticize other HR professionals. Please do not take this the wrong way, but if you disagree with my perspective, feel free to share your thoughts. As a newcomer, I have a lot to learn from experienced individuals like you.
Thanks & Regards,
Uday
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Shwetha,
Hi Shahed,
It's a good topic you have raised.
Thanks for commenting on this.
We call ourselves "Strategic Partners," and in this situation, you blame the company. I don't agree with all of you. Is it that you just want to convince yourselves and say you are a strategic partner when you actually restrict yourselves from going deep into the facts and analyzing the strategy of top management?
Firstly, I do agree with your valid point that we are Strategic partners, and I must clarify that I am not blaming the company. I have raised the question of what made the top management decide that we need to recruit manpower, and then after a couple of months, suddenly cut jobs as a cost-cutting measure.
If the company feels that it can no longer bear the expenses of manpower, it surely makes a good decision. A good decision is to fire any employee, but on the grounds of non-performance. I openly say that at times management also makes wrong decisions, and when some subordinates try to give their viewpoint, it is usually termed as "confrontation." It won't be wrong to say that at times our risk management strategies also fail. It might not cause harm to management, but it is a genuine loss to employees who work hard but are still left demotivated.
Let aside our soft-natured humanity as HR professionals, but be practical. If the company has insufficient funds, do you think you can survive in the market by paying salaries to employees with no return on investment? Being professional and practical is excellent, but "HR" itself means Human Resources, and its setup in the company is not just for the company but for employees' well-being. HR people are also known as trustworthy individuals. HR acts as a bridge between management and employees.
Why do you deny the fact that even employees cold-heartedly ditch the company and go to competitors for better perks? Why do you feel bad if the reverse is happening to them? Take it positively. Just spread a rumor that the company is not profitable, and you will see that by the next payroll, you would be calculating final settlements for at least 50% of the employees.
I agree with you on the point that "employees cold-heartedly ditch the company and go to competitors for better perks," but in this situation, HR also has to take hard measures to address it. I am not criticizing the HR community, but there are HR professionals who make false promises to fill positions and play with an employee's future. In fact, on this website, you may find several issues related to that.
Yes, I admit that it incurs recruitment costs, but that should be planned well in advance backed by good mid and senior-level management strategy.
Thanks to you for agreeing at some point.
I hope I have not hurt the feelings of my friends by being more practical. You will understand this concept when you work for Small & Medium Enterprises, where management struggles to bear even simple overheads like staff parties, picnics, or even administration costs like visiting cards. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I want Shwetha to reply to me.
Dear, I am not hurt, and I hope that you also take this conversation in the right way. By the way, I used to work in India's biggest retail chain but recently shifted to a mid-sized MNC in Delhi. But, my dear friend, the situation is the same.
Lastly, I must say that this issue is not to raise any comments on any said strategy, but it was posted to get different mindsets' views on it.
Thanks,
Shahed
Thanks,
Shweta Jaitly
From India, Coimbatore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Shahed,
It's a good topic you have raised.
Thanks for commenting on this.
We call ourselves "Strategic Partners," and in this situation, you blame the company. I don't agree with all of you. Is it that you just want to convince yourselves and say you are a strategic partner when you actually restrict yourselves from going deep into the facts and analyzing the strategy of top management?
Firstly, I do agree with your valid point that we are Strategic partners, and I must clarify that I am not blaming the company. I have raised the question of what made the top management decide that we need to recruit manpower, and then after a couple of months, suddenly cut jobs as a cost-cutting measure.
If the company feels that it can no longer bear the expenses of manpower, it surely makes a good decision. A good decision is to fire any employee, but on the grounds of non-performance. I openly say that at times management also makes wrong decisions, and when some subordinates try to give their viewpoint, it is usually termed as "confrontation." It won't be wrong to say that at times our risk management strategies also fail. It might not cause harm to management, but it is a genuine loss to employees who work hard but are still left demotivated.
Let aside our soft-natured humanity as HR professionals, but be practical. If the company has insufficient funds, do you think you can survive in the market by paying salaries to employees with no return on investment? Being professional and practical is excellent, but "HR" itself means Human Resources, and its setup in the company is not just for the company but for employees' well-being. HR people are also known as trustworthy individuals. HR acts as a bridge between management and employees.
Why do you deny the fact that even employees cold-heartedly ditch the company and go to competitors for better perks? Why do you feel bad if the reverse is happening to them? Take it positively. Just spread a rumor that the company is not profitable, and you will see that by the next payroll, you would be calculating final settlements for at least 50% of the employees.
I agree with you on the point that "employees cold-heartedly ditch the company and go to competitors for better perks," but in this situation, HR also has to take hard measures to address it. I am not criticizing the HR community, but there are HR professionals who make false promises to fill positions and play with an employee's future. In fact, on this website, you may find several issues related to that.
Yes, I admit that it incurs recruitment costs, but that should be planned well in advance backed by good mid and senior-level management strategy.
Thanks to you for agreeing at some point.
I hope I have not hurt the feelings of my friends by being more practical. You will understand this concept when you work for Small & Medium Enterprises, where management struggles to bear even simple overheads like staff parties, picnics, or even administration costs like visiting cards. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I want Shwetha to reply to me.
Dear, I am not hurt, and I hope that you also take this conversation in the right way. By the way, I used to work in India's biggest retail chain but recently shifted to a mid-sized MNC in Delhi. But, my dear friend, the situation is the same.
Lastly, I must say that this issue is not to raise any comments on any said strategy, but it was posted to get different mindsets' views on it.
Thanks,
Shahed
Thanks,
Shweta Jaitly
From India, Coimbatore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
All of us have been giving our inputs on this topic. Following comments are my opinion.
While all of us agree that manpower planning should be done properly, however, the management might be taking all this into consideration. For example, from the time a deal is signed and the project is transitioned and executed on a pilot basis, there is a time lag, and the manpower planning takes place as per the deal. Suddenly, due to some crisis or unforeseen circumstances, if the deal is canceled, which might not be due to the fault of the company we are working for, we might lose our jobs. But did the company always have this policy of hire and fire? I don't think so.
The second scenario might be one of the companies which is our client, might not be in a position to operate anymore due to losses, where it affects our revenue and we might have to look at either repositioning ourselves or losing some of us. In this case, there might be employees performing at 80% and the others at 90%. Both are considered to be good performers, but in situations like this, the 90% of the performers would be preferred over the rest.
The third scenario might be that our company itself is troubled due to unforeseen external factors, so how can the company keep its operations going on? It cannot or will have to accommodate the job cuts to see that at least some of the employees have jobs by trying to get the company on track.
Despite all these issues, which are continuously ongoing, the management, I think, never discourages any employee-oriented programs and facilities for the employees in either good or even average times.
So why are we only discussing the tough times we face when being asked to leave and not appreciating the employers for taking care of us in the good times?
If we are in the HR profession, I think we must be able to evaluate some of the parameters and be able to take a certain stand that can be a win-win situation even in these troubled times. If not possible, then some hard measures as well. HR is not only about creating employee welfare and development-related programs but also to be of strategic value to the organization. Always remember we are the face of both the employees and the employer and will need to act accordingly.
This is my opinion, and I stand corrected if I am wrong.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
All of us have been giving our inputs on this topic. Following comments are my opinion.
While all of us agree that manpower planning should be done properly, however, the management might be taking all this into consideration. For example, from the time a deal is signed and the project is transitioned and executed on a pilot basis, there is a time lag, and the manpower planning takes place as per the deal. Suddenly, due to some crisis or unforeseen circumstances, if the deal is canceled, which might not be due to the fault of the company we are working for, we might lose our jobs. But did the company always have this policy of hire and fire? I don't think so.
The second scenario might be one of the companies which is our client, might not be in a position to operate anymore due to losses, where it affects our revenue and we might have to look at either repositioning ourselves or losing some of us. In this case, there might be employees performing at 80% and the others at 90%. Both are considered to be good performers, but in situations like this, the 90% of the performers would be preferred over the rest.
The third scenario might be that our company itself is troubled due to unforeseen external factors, so how can the company keep its operations going on? It cannot or will have to accommodate the job cuts to see that at least some of the employees have jobs by trying to get the company on track.
Despite all these issues, which are continuously ongoing, the management, I think, never discourages any employee-oriented programs and facilities for the employees in either good or even average times.
So why are we only discussing the tough times we face when being asked to leave and not appreciating the employers for taking care of us in the good times?
If we are in the HR profession, I think we must be able to evaluate some of the parameters and be able to take a certain stand that can be a win-win situation even in these troubled times. If not possible, then some hard measures as well. HR is not only about creating employee welfare and development-related programs but also to be of strategic value to the organization. Always remember we are the face of both the employees and the employer and will need to act accordingly.
This is my opinion, and I stand corrected if I am wrong.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Siva, I agree with you as this was just one aspect of Management.........But there are companies which are very employee friendly also...... Regards Shweta
From India, Coimbatore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Coimbatore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Sweta,
Today, our company sacked one employee. He was recruited as a Mechanical draftsman and worked with us for 2.5 months in that role. However, it was reported by his subordinates that despite being 47 years old, he lacked the necessary knowledge to supervise them effectively.
As a result, my boss reassigned him from the Design department to the Production group to work as a supervisor. After 8 months with the organization, he was terminated with an additional month's payment.
I hold my engineering group accountable for this situation. Their inaccurate forecasting of the manpower requirements led to placing a draftsman in a role unsuitable for him, that of a production supervisor.
I am seeking input from senior members on this matter.
Regards,
Dinamani
From India, Calcutta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Today, our company sacked one employee. He was recruited as a Mechanical draftsman and worked with us for 2.5 months in that role. However, it was reported by his subordinates that despite being 47 years old, he lacked the necessary knowledge to supervise them effectively.
As a result, my boss reassigned him from the Design department to the Production group to work as a supervisor. After 8 months with the organization, he was terminated with an additional month's payment.
I hold my engineering group accountable for this situation. Their inaccurate forecasting of the manpower requirements led to placing a draftsman in a role unsuitable for him, that of a production supervisor.
I am seeking input from senior members on this matter.
Regards,
Dinamani
From India, Calcutta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi, Shweta,
Two days ago, we saw the same situation result in Greater Noida. The CEO was killed by a worker. Yes, in today's scenario, this issue is very critical, and the HR role is very important. I must say that manpower planning and industry situation can play a vital role in solving this problem. If HR can make proper manpower planning while sitting with production and finance guys, maybe this situation can be minimized. This is my thinking.
Regards,
Samir Arya
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Two days ago, we saw the same situation result in Greater Noida. The CEO was killed by a worker. Yes, in today's scenario, this issue is very critical, and the HR role is very important. I must say that manpower planning and industry situation can play a vital role in solving this problem. If HR can make proper manpower planning while sitting with production and finance guys, maybe this situation can be minimized. This is my thinking.
Regards,
Samir Arya
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Shweta,
If this issue is viewed on humanitarian grounds, then it would be unfair and unethical. However, being a professional, you have to obey the orders and instructions from the seniors. A quote from ARMY ethics states: "1st is your nation, 2nd is the honor, safety, and welfare of the men you command, your family, friends, and society come 3rd, and your own dignity, pride, and comfort are always the last."
If this is taken to a civil context, it follows as: "1st is your organization, 2nd is the honor, safety, and welfare of the men you work with, your family, friends, and society come 3rd, and your own dignity, pride, and comfort are always the last."
So, don't worry and take it professionally.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If this issue is viewed on humanitarian grounds, then it would be unfair and unethical. However, being a professional, you have to obey the orders and instructions from the seniors. A quote from ARMY ethics states: "1st is your nation, 2nd is the honor, safety, and welfare of the men you command, your family, friends, and society come 3rd, and your own dignity, pride, and comfort are always the last."
If this is taken to a civil context, it follows as: "1st is your organization, 2nd is the honor, safety, and welfare of the men you work with, your family, friends, and society come 3rd, and your own dignity, pride, and comfort are always the last."
So, don't worry and take it professionally.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi all,
We all agree that HIRE & FIRE is a result of poor planning. This also highlights that our accuracy in analyzing the market and future business opportunities is lacking. We have failed to analyze the requirements and business growth. When the business plan fails, every organization should equip themselves with a contingency plan, in simple terms, Plan B when Plan A fails. This way, it can retain performers in the organization rather than lay them off.
The current situation is a trigger for all corporate giants to work towards risk management and continuity plans for their human capital.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
We all agree that HIRE & FIRE is a result of poor planning. This also highlights that our accuracy in analyzing the market and future business opportunities is lacking. We have failed to analyze the requirements and business growth. When the business plan fails, every organization should equip themselves with a contingency plan, in simple terms, Plan B when Plan A fails. This way, it can retain performers in the organization rather than lay them off.
The current situation is a trigger for all corporate giants to work towards risk management and continuity plans for their human capital.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello Shweta,
It is sad to see good manpower going down the drain, but let us all agree on one thing: retrenchment is a reality in which we live. It is good to know that you sympathize with employees. When it comes to saving the company from collapse, it is the juniormost that get axed; I know the pain all too well. What can be done is, at least, the employees should be given ample time to hunt for another job and also use the office resources to do so. This market slowdown did not happen overnight; it was management which failed to foresee such a scenario. They could have planned the layoff a little bit better.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It is sad to see good manpower going down the drain, but let us all agree on one thing: retrenchment is a reality in which we live. It is good to know that you sympathize with employees. When it comes to saving the company from collapse, it is the juniormost that get axed; I know the pain all too well. What can be done is, at least, the employees should be given ample time to hunt for another job and also use the office resources to do so. This market slowdown did not happen overnight; it was management which failed to foresee such a scenario. They could have planned the layoff a little bit better.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
Termination-emp loyment_563.pdf
Checklist for Hiring Employees.doc