Employee retrenchment is not a new case that has been prevalent only in Pacific Brands but is more or less a trend in many organizations of varied size. The question is whether the demand of the employer to give more priority of their concern to the profit of the organization or whether to uphold the interest of the employee who has helped them in reaching the stage they are at today (Mariappanadar, 2003, pp. 906 – 923). It has however been commonly noticed that employers tend to do so when they realise weakened financial performance or in other cases when they feel the necessity to do so in search of much more viable and greener pastures.
It is not always true that employees are linked to the organization and the employee through financial modes but the connection is also personal and emotional. Employees are to be considered as the driving force of the organization and its business, thereby adding it to their asset base and not rather a liability. In other words the success of a business is total only when it has been able to retain its employees by and large, at least the part of them who have remained with the organization for a considerable number of years (Wyer, Mason & Theodorakopoulos, 2000, pp. 239 – 259). While on one side the ability of employers to retain employees by attracting them to the job is a measure of the organizational success, on the other hand the capability of the business to grow in parallel with the employee is another substantial measure of the business success.
Organizations in general do not retrench any employee without any vested interest. It is a known fact and reality that all business firms do not operate in the not-for-profit model but it however does not entitle them to increase profits through cost reduction strategies and employee layoff. In industries and manufacturing units the major portion of the work is performed by the people at the bottom of the ladder and the success of the firm largely depends on the quality of the work done by them (Lester, Parnell, Crandall & Menefee, 2008, pp. 313 – 330).
The human resource department of any organization functions to effectively manage employees and business needs holistically and thus an important task in their activity is strategy-related planning. The planning activity is not just scheduling of work and resources but comprehensively studying the future needs, present situation and decision making on the basis of past performance and cases. In the event that Pacific Brands had done this exercise accurately they would not have found a need to reduce employees in such a short notice. While assessing the organizational needs, the environmental analysis is also to be done from an operational perspective to assess the best location for their production and supply activities. Consequently there would not have been a need to relocate production so rapidly and would not have to think of layoffs.
员工紧缩不是一个新的情况,普遍只在太平洋品牌,但是或多或少的趋势在许多组织中不同的大小。问题是雇主的需求给予更多的优先关注利润的组织和维护员工的利益是否帮助他们达到他们在今天的舞台(Mariappanadar,2003年,页。906 – 923年)。一般但是已经注意到雇主倾向于这么做当他们意识到削弱财务业绩或在其他情况下,当他们觉得这样做的必要性更加可行和更绿色的牧场。
这并不总是真的,员工与组织和员工通过金融模式但也是个人和情感的连接。员工被认为是组织及其业务的驱动力,从而增加他们的资产基础,而不是责任。换句话说一个商业的成功是总只有当它能够留住员工总的来说,至少部分与组织保持了相当数量的年(瓦伊,梅森& Theodorakopoulos,2000,页239 – 259)。而一边雇主能够留住员工,吸引他们的工作是衡量组织的成功,另一方面业务能力的增长与员工是业务成功的另一个实质性的措施。
组织一般不删除任何员工没有任何既得利益。这是一个已知的事实和现实,所有企业的运作非营利模式但它但是不赋予他们通过降低成本来增加利润和员工裁员策略。工业和制造业的单位工作的主要部分由人执行梯子的底部和公司的成功很大程度上取决于他们所做的工作的质量(莱斯特、帕内尔Crandall & Menefee,2008,页313 – 330)。