Thursday February 16, 2012

Is taking redundancy a good idea?

The Nikkei reported in November that Nikko Cordial Securities was planning to substantially reduce its 7,000-person work force by offering employees “early retirement” packages, otherwise known as redundancy packages in the West. Apparently employees aged 40 are the main target and given that the company has a strong seniority culture, it is understandable that it would make the offer to the older, more expensive employees first.

What is redundancy? Basically it’s an effort by a company to let go of a large number of employees in a civilized way, without the abrupt shock of them being fired, nor the repercussions of union action or potential law suits. This approach is usually more expensive than simply firing staff, but is much better for morale since it’s voluntary, and it avoids the potential additional unplanned costs of lawyers and negative PR in the media.

Generally a redundancy program involves management identifying and approaching a particular group of employees, which in Japanese companies will be the more expensive older people, and in foreign firms will be everyone in a particular business division that will be trimmed or closed down. Typically the program applies equally to everyone within the target group, else the fairness of the program may be at risk and this could open the company to claims from ex-employees later.

The company is buying compliancy from those leaving the business, and so you can expect that the pay-out will be significantly better than a standard severance package if you were fired. There is no real standard for redundancy packages in the market, but a typical lower end offer would be around one month’s pay for every year worked, plus 1-3 months severance pay. So if you’ve been in a company for three years, you’d expect somewhere between 4-6 months of pay plus the month you’re finishing up on. Now, I have heard of some better-financed companies offering a full 12 months or even more redundancy pay, but this is more typically for high-level managers and where the numbers being made redundant are fairly small (possibly just the one person).

So what if you don’t accept the redundancy package? Does this mean that you will be fired later? Well, redundancy programs are supposed to be fair, equal, and voluntary, so in theory not taking redundancy shouldn’t affect you too much. But, in offering such packages, obviously the company is hurting, and particularly if there is going to be a closure of a particular piece of the business, you may find your job at risk. Therefore, look carefully at the reasons why the package is being offered and make sure that you have found an alternative position elsewhere in the company just in case. You should be able to find those positions open in other departments by socializing with your colleagues and managers of those teams - something you should always be doing anyway.

Getting a redundancy pay-out can be very attractive. If you’re faced with receiving many months of salary at once, it can be hard to turn down. Mentally you’re thinking, “OK, I’ll take a couple of months off, I’ve been stressed out anyway, pay off the credit card bills, then go back into the job market. I still have months in which to find another job.” But now that we’re at the start of a recession and this one will probably last at least most of 2009, you need to be cognizant of the risks of being unemployed, especially if you’re over 45.

What may initially appear to be a great deal and a temporary respite for a stretched family budget can quickly turn into a nightmare. The problem is that not having a job when you go in for interviews at new companies will lead them to suspect that there may be something wrong with you since your previous employer let you go. Of course, you can argue that the redundancy was equally offered to everyone, but the fact is that not working is a major point of weakness in negotiating a new job. This is a human nature thing. Therefore, if you are going to apply to take a redundancy package, make sure that you have another job to go to BEFORE you leave the current firm.

Terrie Lloyd writes a weekly newsletter for entrepreneurs and business people about business and political opportunities in Japan. You can find the newsletter at www.japaninc.com.

  • 0

    zaichik

    Wise words from Terrie, as ever. My partner was made redundant in September after the company he worked for lost a big contract with Microsoft (another casualty of outsourcing to India). He was laid off with a month's pay in lieu of notice (although we'd been aware for a couple of months that this was likely). There was no element of choice or severance package in Mr Zaichik's case, but fortunately the CEO put in a good word for him with a company in a similar line of work, and he was able to get another job with better pay less than a month after losing the first one. Fingers crossed that this one proves to be more permanent....

  • 0

    Sarge

    "early retirement"

    I wish I could take that.

  • 0

    gogogo

    Redundancy means there is no job for you anymore you have become redundant, I've never really seen this in Japan, just retrenchment, here's your 1 month salary now please leave.

  • 0

    SmartPartner

    Sound advice as always from Terri. This ties in to my commentary about schools and cert courses having a solid year next year. 4 to 6 months of salary will stretch a looooong way in China and Costa Rica I reckon.

  • 0

    Nessie

    known as redundancy packages in the West

    Um...only in outlying verges of the West.

  • 0

    Nessie

    What is redundancy? Basically it’s an effort by a company to let go of a large number of employees in a civilized way, without the abrupt shock of them being fired, nor the repercussions of union action or potential law suits.

    Um, only in British labor law. The common definition of redundancy includes firing. Perhaps you mean "voluntary redundancy," Terrie, which has semantic problems of its own.

  • 0

    mareo2

    Hmm... in the current times, is good read about these kind of things.

  • 0

    ThonTaddeo

    Anyone know if you can arrange a visa renewal after taking a redundancy package? (I. e., are you still considered "employed" for the months that you're still benig paid?)

    If you, as a ten-year veteran on a visa with four months to go, could get ten months' pay in such a package and space the payments over ten months just like a regular salary, and then renew your visa, it would be a lot more attractive than taking a lump sum only to find that you can't relax because you've only got a few months left on the visa to find another job!

  • 0

    dontpanic

    All semantics really as at the end of the day you dont have a job, however early retirement is generally offered to those with long service (ie higher paid) and will often include a payment and a contribution to the pension fund.
    Redundancy essentially means your job is no longer there and so off you go. Voluntary redundancy is a good way to control layoffs and buy some loyalty. Unfortunately in the current climate if there are not enough volunteers its possible to see some level of compulsion as we are seeing currently with so called 'temporary workers', some of which have been employed for a long period and wouldnt be thought of a temps elewhere.

  • 0

    Nessie

    About your question, I hope it's not you who's in the jumping/being pushed boat, Thon. I'd hate to see you not posting here anymore.

  • 0

    gaijintraveller

    Instead of offering the choice of too much work or none, why not offer less work? How many people would go for an offer of a four day week? How many would accept one or two months annual holiday?

    The increase of free time for people still earning a salary could have other benefits for the economy by increasing the time in which they can spend money.

  • 0

    hold the Mao

    That is a very sharp idea, Gaijintraveller. Nice post, thanks.

  • 0

    SimondB

    One thing people should be clear about is that the job has become redundant, or is no longer there. The person who has lost his job is not redundant as such, simply his job no longer exists. For an older person redundancy can be the first step to redefining their life and planning, with a good payout, their twilight years.

    For younger or lower paid workers redundancy offers immediate cash but can in the medium term lead to major problems, particulary in a depressed labour market or when the redundant employee has little in the way off skills to offer new employers. A factory worker living on a week to week finacial existence may after ten years in the job be invited to apply for voluntary redundancy. The carrot is a lump sum beyond anything he could dream of saving in the forseeable future. Lets say in dollar terms he could walk away with $10,000. Now the plasma TV, car repairs, the holiday are all possible. And he piles into it. The 10K becomes 5K but still more than he has ever had. New clothes for the kids, new stereo....no problem. Then the 5K becomes 2K. Still a lot of money by his standards. But although he and his family survived before on week to week wages now he is looking at a months wages up his sleeve. Starts looking for a job and finds all those other people who took redundancy with him are also looking for jobs. Welfare wont help him because three monthd ago he had 10K. Becomes desperate to get any job. Ends up flipping burgers, pumping gas or cleaning toilets on minimum wage. Now worse off then he and his family were three months ago.

    Was it worth it? At the right time in your life a redundancy package can be a good thing. But I have in my line of work seen many people like the one I describe above take the money and run. And then begin to stumble. And then fall over completely and pull all around them - those nearest and dearest - down with them.

  • 0

    ThonTaddeo

    Nessie, nothing to worry about; I'm not gonig anywhere! Just thinking hypothetically.

    Gaijintraveler, while I certailny like your idea a lot, I wonder what fixed costs (per employee) have to be borne by employers. I wouldn't be surprised if those costs make it more profitable for a company to pay ten people to work 50 hours a week than to pay twenty people to each work 25 hours.

Login to leave a comment

OR

Follow us

More in Commentary

View all

View all