Understanding a RIF

YW

I thought I had just recently read an article here or someplace else that had explained the differences between a reduction in force, a layoff, a reorganization and a furlough. Can anyone help me as to where I may have read this article or explain what the differences are? Thank you.

Don D

>I thought I had just recently read an article here or someplace else
>that had explained the differences between a reduction in force, a
>layoff, a reorganization and a furlough. Can anyone help me as to
>where I may have read this article or explain what the differences
>are? Thank you.


A RIF can be the result of a reorganization and technically those people are laid off, for UI purposes. A furlough typically has an end date. A layoff sometimes has a set end date whereas a RIF typically has no recall expectation. It's all a matter of wordplay though. RIFs generally are a result of downsizing permanently and most of the time carry severence pay, whereas layoffs rarely are paid severence. Furlough, which equates to layoff, is a military term that found its way into industry. Layoff is the often politically incorrect, yet accurate, term used to describe somebody who gets sent to the house through no fault of his own (supposedly). Often people who present problems for the company are eased off the premises through layoff or RIF. Downsizing, rightsizing, leaning the workforce, restructuring or elimination all equal (typically) qualification for unemployment insurance. You may have noticed your name no longer appears on our organizational chart....can I see you for a moment about 4pm this afternoon in my office? Have I confused you or what?

YW

No you haven't. I think I get the picture. A RIF is pretty permanent in meaning that the position is either being eliminated or simply will not be replaced (at least not in the near future). A lay-off may elude to a call back, but maybe not. If a lay-off is done, would the employer have tot state at that time if call back is possible? If the future looks brighter down the road, would an employer have to call back a laid off worker before filling a vacant position with someone else? A furlough would involve say, ok, the company will shut down for 2 weeks and no employees will be paid during that time, correct?

Don D

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 04-23-03 AT 09:49AM (CST)[/font][p]If a union is involved, the company typically must call back laid off workers in reverse order of layoff prior to hiring off the street. If the company has no union but a policy on seniority and callback exists, then the policy would dictate. If neither a union nor a policy exists, unless there is an unusual state law, the employer is under no obligation to call someone back. The rub comes when he learns you hired off the street and he had applied and files a charge of discrimination of some sort claiming he was the best qualified applicant available and you refused him re-employment due to the fact that he is a one armed, obese Jewish guy over 40, from a mixed marriage, who had earlier taken FMLA and filed an EEOC charge before at your company.

No, you're under no obligation to predict a callback date or even the reality of one, when you lay someone off. The claims office may ask you, but you're under no obligation there either. In my state, if the shutdown is an announced, regular, recurring one week layoff, say, for maintenance or vacation shutdown, the claimant is NOT eligible for unemployment insurance. So, in that event we WOULD tell the claimstaker of those circumstances and recall certainty.

Any RIF I've had experience with involved position elimination, downsizing, no known prospects of recall and severence. Let me back up...I do know of one that we termed a RIF, position elimination, let an old guy go, redrew the org chart, then a month later filled the position and drew the chart again. A plaintiff's attorney's dream!

moneyman

If I could jump in with a question ...

We just had a RIF a month ago that was supposed to be 3 employees and the director ended up with cold feet I think and only made it 1 person. Now, 30 days later, he is re-thinking that decision and wants to put 1 person on "furlough". Do you think we will have a problem with that? We don't want this person to seek other employment because we expect new business in a few weeks, however, we don't have anything for them to do now. She is salary-exempt by the way. I wouldn't blame her for looking/finding another job, but what do we need to be careful of if we want her to take 2 weeks off, unpaid?