RIF vs Layoff?

CAHR

Can you tell me the difference between a Reduction in Force and a Layoff? As your business is slow right now, we may have to let go about 15 employees - however, hopefully business will pick up (in a few months) and then those jobs will open up again - however, that remains to be seen. So, for the employees... how I have seen in the past, is that in a lay-off, there is no severance and if the jobs open up, we will call those employees and give them first chance in coming back (but obviously, no guarantee)... In a RIF, we are not planning on bringing them back and there normally is some kind of "severance"... Are there other differences in these two classifications? Your past practices or thoughts? Thanks so much!

ray a

I guess I've always thought RIF was just a fancy name for a layoff. In NY, we categorize layoffs one of two ways, temporary or permanent. If a temporary layoff, I have to give the ee a return-to-work date. Either way, they receive the same UI benefits. We have given severance packages only to the highest levels of management.

ritaanz

We do not give severance to employees on layoff or RIF. To me, lay off and reduction in force are the same.

Severance is given when an employee loses their job because the position has been eliminated.

allsteaks

Our view is a layoff is a temporary slowdown or lull in business requiring a short term or temporary reduction in employees. RIF is a permanent reduction in the workforce due to downsizing or relocation of production or service capability, or parts thereof, with no current expectation of resuming. This would likely match up to Ray's permanent layoff. We also only offer severance to top level management.

jitrbug

Whether we offer severance packages or not,
we consider a RIF a permanent don't expect to
open or have the jobs back within a year. A
layoff is the expectation that the jobs will open back up and the people recalled to those positions. This is also how the airline industry
(which is typically union) views the differences as well.

E Wart

I agree with the above. I think a RIF is the "current politically correct" term for layoff (sometimes I call it a rightsizing). However, I do personally consider a RIF a "reorganization, job has been elmininated, you won't be called back" type of "layoff". When I use the term "layoff" I normally think that this is temporary, for a set amount of time and then you come back. I don't use "layoff" if we don't know how long the person will be off. That I consider a RIF.
For my term of "layoff", we don't use any severence (but haven't had this happen since I have been employed, 7+ years.) For RIF, we look at each occurrence and determine if severence is warrented. (Normally we do give some, but situation depends on how much and we decide at that time.) We don't have a written Severence Policy (which I have been advised not to write one. This way you can make determinations at the time and aren't held to anything.)
Tough time and I don't envy you. However, I must admit, most of the times I have been involved in a RIF, it works out well for the released employees in about 80% of the cases.
E Wart

ritaanz

El, at one time, I too was advised not to put the severance policy in writing. Howeber, we termiated an employee because his position had been eliminated. He was not happy with his severance package and got a lawyer. The ex-employee's lawyer got letters from several other terminated employees stating what their packages were. In order to stay out of court with a jury trial, we settled and paid him additional severance that he ceratinly did not deserve.