Reduction in workforce

At the very least, an HR office will usually verify (1) that the individual did work there, (2) the dates of employment, and (3) the job title. The company may or may not release salary information or why an employment relationship ended. However, many organizations verify or refute data that you provide to them. Therefore you can ask questions such as, This person says her final salary was 30,000. Is that consistent with your records or This person indicates his employment ended due to a reduction in workforce. Is that what your records show The respondent can then simply answer with a yes or no. 

The indirect effects of these programs may also be important. Anecdotal evidence suggests that injury claims tend to increase with announced reductions in workforce or as local unemployment rates rise. We estimate how layoffs affect claim duration by including a duimny variable indicating whetherthe firm has experienced any recent employment layoffs or cutbacks. In our models, we were also interested to see whether any of the corporate safety culture variables listed in the previous paragraph modify the layoff/claim-duration effect that is, whether there are interactions between HRM practices and downsizing. 

See Vegas Village Shopping Corp., 229 NLRB 279 (1977) (loss of jobs) Whiting Mfg. Co. Inc., 258 NLRB 58 (1981) (loss of business) Andersen Cottonwood Concrete Products, Inc., 246 NLRB No. 172 (1979) (reduction in workforce and plant closure). 

Teijin is endeavouring to restore profitability to its European films operations by investigating productivity improvements and by looking at possible reductions in workforce numbers. 

High labor costs In processes in which excessive handling is required, such as in batch operation, bulk quantities can often be handled at lower cost and with a smaller workforce. Revised layouts of facilities can reduce costs. Sometimes no direct reduction in the labor force results, but the intangible benefits of a lessened workload can allow the operator to assume greater responsibility. 

The next stage in the model is the reduction of risk by having known adverse agents of injury or illness controlled or removed. The reduction in risk leads to the final stage, which is an improvement in health and safety status of the workforce. This general model leads to a more specific approach that can be applied at specific workplaces. 

In addition to the motivating factors, safety and health professionals should be aware that the safety and health function, unlike other operational functions, can be influenced by other factors beyond the safety and health professional s control, which can impact the safety and health function and motivation of the workforce. For example, if the operation is anticipating a reduction in the workforce (RIF), this anticipation could result in higher injury rates, increased workers compensation costs, and related factors. The safety and health function also possesses the seasonal or operational ebb and flow of the specific operations. For example, the number of slip-and-fall injuries increases during the months of November through February when snow is on the ground. Safety and health professionals should be keyed in to the unique features of the specific operations and workforce. 

One particularly troublesome issue to do with workforce reductions is that, when cuts are made, it is often the personnel with more experience who leave. Such people, being older, are more likely to be qualified for early retirement or the package. Also, their departure leads to a greater reduction in costs because they are paid more than the younger employees. Unfortunately, this means that the newer people have fewer gray-haired mentors to monitor their actions and decisions. This loss of experience problem is not new— indeed it is the theme of Trevor Kletz s book. Lessons from Disaster—How Organizations Have No Memory and Accidents Recur (Kletz, 1993). 

One consequence of the relentless reductions in the workforce is that people become so busy that they do not have enough time for detailed work. In particular, they do not have time to check their work, or the work of their colleagues. Hence a greater chance that errors will slip through exists. 

The private sector will benefit directly if the Millennium Development Goals are achieved by having access to a healthier and better educated workforce, a more stable investment climate, and a reduction in the business risks that accompany poverty-related problems such as global insecurity, climate change and ethnic conflict. It will also benefit from the vast new markets that will be created by drawing the 4 billion people that currently live on less than US 2 per day into economic life [22]. 

On the negative side, reduction in offshore workforce can weaken the human barrier element proximate to the potential hazards. Use of acontextual (non-10), historical data for planning of barriers may give another negative effect. A similar effect arise if barriers are based solely on models of work processes, without reflecting the changes in work forms. 

The possible negative effects from reduction in offshore workforce is not inhibited, but maybe dampened by the close, daily on-/offshore cooperation and rotation. 

Cost of changing production Production quantities can be changed by changing the workforce level (hiring, firing, lay off, etc.). Let P( X() represent the cost of changing production from period (f - 1) to period t. Note that X( > Xt y if the workforce level is increased and X( < X( i, if there is a reduction in the workforce. 

This case provides relatively little support for Worksafe s claims. There was a dramatic drop in the total number of injuries and total injury costs, but this was largely a consequence of the big cut in the workforce. Most of the safety data presented in the study do not take account of this reduction in employee numbers and so are essentially uninterpretable. The one exception is the lost-time injury frequency rate which does show a decline. The new technology played a part in this decline since it is inherently safer than the old. Presumably, attention to OHS also played a part. Finally, it must be stressed that the very substantial increase in productivity which the mill has experienced has nothing to do with improved safety and everything to do with the state-of-the-art technology installed. Any suggestion that the productivity gains at the plant were due to a focus on health and safety would be entirely fallacious. 

---