Layoff Plans

ray a

We rank our ee's each quarter. The rankings are used for several purposes, bonuses, raise plan, promotions, and layoffs. Typically, if we are having a layoff (rare, but does happen), we use the previous ranking which should be no more than a couple months old. This can cause some consternation with the supervisors because obviously they would prefer to rerank at the time of the event.

For those of you who experience the occasional layoff and follow a merit based process, how many of you use a previously done ranking and how many will rank ee's immediately prior to the layoff?

Wildsporty

When we have a cutback or Reduction in Force as we call them we do not use rankings at all.

What we do is evaluate the jobs and figure out which jobs we can either cut out or incorporate into another position. We then eliminate those positions.

Shirley

Tony Kessler

Ray, here is a response to your question from Dennis Merley, an employment law attorney with Felhaber, Larson, Fenlon and Vogt, P.A., in Minneapolis. As the editor of Minnesota Employment Law Letter, he just finished running a two-part series on layoffs and RIFs in his July and August 2006 issues (you can find them in the newsletter archives on this website by searching for "RIF" or "layoffs" in "Minnesota" in "2006"). Because of Dennis' research and experience, we're talking with him about holding a national audio conference on the subject on October 25. If that happens, I'm sure we'll let you know about it! tk
----------------
If you are confident that the ranking system is objective and fair, I see few problems in using the most recent rankings for current layoff decisions, even if they're a couple of months old. If they're valid for determining present entitlement to bonuses or promotions, they should be just as valid for layoffs.

There could be an issue if an employee has emerged as a deficient performer or discipline problem since the last ranking. That seems relatively unlikely, however, and the benefits of not having to recalculate rankings again seem to outweigh that risk.

Dennis Merley
[email]dmerley@felhaber.com[/email]