A 1 Position Reduction in Force
JACHR1979
20 Posts
My company is planning a reorganization and restructuring of departments, as a result one position will be eliminated. In the new organization format, the particular position in question will no longer be needed. That position's duties will be naturally dispersed once the reorganization happens creating a more effective and more efficient interdepartmental flow.
What are some things I need to keep in mind in regards to this particular RIF since it is only one employee who will be affected? There are no other positions available that the employee would be qualified for, and we will not rehire for their current position since it is being eliminated.
Comments
[quote user="TXHRGuy"]A 1-person RIF is almost worse than the typical case because it is easier for plaintiff's attorney to characterize it as a pretextual termination. You need to do your best to be compassionate but also complete in explaning to the RIF'd person so that they leave your office believing that it was the right thing for the Company to do.[/quote]
1.We have 2 office employees that we pay very well. There is no need for two for work has moved out of townir. Of the two, the one we hired for backup for the office manger is the one we would like to keep. The office manager, (who has been there longer) we would like to let go and not hire anyone for her position. One person is more than capable. Do you think there are any ramifications for doing this?
2. If we gave her 2 weeks worth of pay when we let her go, could she still file for unemployment? How could severance pay work out and/or is it required?
AK
uno) This sounds like you are firing the office manager and replacing her with her assistant. Is there a substantial pay disparity? You can argue that it was simply cheaper to keep the less senior employee because they would do the same work for less money. Is there a history of work quality problems? In the end, you will need to be able to justify why you kept one and let the other go. Everyone at the EEOC and in the jury box will understand that the Company wishes not to pay two people to do the work of one, but they will also want to know why you chose to keep the one you did and why you chose to release the one you didn't. Having that information down in advance will be helpful to you should this crop up 18 months from now.
dos) If you provide two weeks pay but leave the situation such that the Company is initiating the separation, then she will get unemployment after the wage/time clock runs out (2 weeks in this example). I wouldn't be concerned about unemployment. You're firing someone who hasn't done anything wrong (or, at least, not terminable as of the separation) and that's what UI is there to cover. If you do a release and settlement agreement, you typically pay them substantially more money but convert the involuntary termination into a resignation along with getting an agreement not to sue for all manner of things. I have seen RSAs that stipulate that the company will not respond to any requests for information for the purpose of making a UI determination (meaning the employee's word stands and they will get UI even though they resigned). Again, I wouldn't really worry about that. The main thing is you have one too many bodies and this person lost the lottery and there's no reason to be anything but compassionate about their unfortunate situation, particularly since the sense of fairness and generosity in their head will keep her away from attorney offices.
How old are the two individuals? Is the one you let go over the age of 40? Is the other one under the age of 40? That would be my only concern.
I would give severence in this case and I would not fight the unemployment. The money the severence and UI will cost you is a heck of a lot less then if the person were to file a claim with the EEOC.