Do companies avoid laying off underrepresented groups during mass redundancies just to save their diversity metrics...

It is a common misconception that large tech companies make redundancies without considering the impact on their diversity metrics. In reality, when making redundancies, tech companies are required to consider the effect it will have on their diversity metrics. This means that if letting go of certain employees, such as women, minority groups or underrepresented employees, would affect their diversity metrics, they must take this into account and adjust their redundancy plans accordingly.

In addition to considering the effect redundancies will have on their diversity metrics, tech companies must also ensure that any redundancies are made in a fair and equitable manner. This includes ensuring that no employee is discriminated against due to their gender, age, race, religious beliefs or other protected characteristics.

Ultimately, while large tech companies may need to make redundancies in order to remain competitive in the market place, they must always ensure that these decisions are made with consideration for how they will affect the company's overall diversity metrics and without discriminating against any particular group of employees, regardless of whether these groups are the majority, or minority.

Mass-Layoffs

The mass layoffs of 2023 have been a difficult time for many people and businesses across the globe. With the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reporting 880,000 - 1,500,000 people laid off annually from 2000 - 2008 and from 2010 - 2013, the number of those affected by job loss has certainly been significant.

The tech industry has been particularly hard hit with more than 66,000 workers in U.S. based tech companies alone having been laid off in mass job cuts so far this year (2023) according to Crunchbase News. Companies like 亚马逊 , Amazon Web Services (AWS) , 谷歌 , Netflix , Adobe , Tesla , Meta , Twitter , 苹果 , Dell Technologies , PayPal , Dow Jones and 3M 公司 have all had to make difficult decisions about cutting jobs in order to stay afloat during these uncertain times.

The impact of these layoffs is far-reaching and can be felt not only by those who have lost their jobs, but also by those still employed who are now facing intense competition for fewer positions as well as increased workloads due to staff reductions. The "dream job at Big Tech" is no longer the same as it once was with employees feeling less secure in their positions and an overall sense of insecurity among the workforce.

Personally, I've worked in Tech for almost 20 years, and always favoured Tech over other industries when approached about roles, but always had in the back of my head that other industries are certainly more secure, a LOT of the time!

It's not just Big Tech that is feeling the effects of mass layoffs either; one in three companies anticipate laying off 30% or more of their workforce in 2023 according to Resume Builder. This means that even small businesses are having to make tough decisions about staffing levels which can have a devastating impact on local communities and economies.

Fortunately, there are resources available for those affected by mass layoffs such as the Mass Layoff Statistics (MLS) program which collects reports on mass layoff actions that result in workers being separated from their jobs. It's important for those affected by job loss to take advantage of these resources so they can get back on their feet as quickly as possible during this difficult time.

Do companies avoid laying off women, minority groups and underrepresented groups during mass redundancies just to save their diversity metrics

From the past 6 months, and companies facing mass redundancies, most attempt to ensure that any layoffs are done in a way that avoids negatively impacting diversity metrics. Some companies are tempted, and almost forced to prioritise cutting costs over valuing diversity and inclusivity, but this can backfire in the long run. Studies have found that diverse and inclusive teams tend to have higher levels of creativity, collaboration and productivity, and during mass layoffs, are often more secure to ensure that companies are not diminishing their "hard work" in DE&I.

In order to preserve the diversity of your workforce, you may opt for layoffs that do not disproportionately target women, minority groups and other underrepresented demographics. This can help protect hard-earned progress towards greater diversity in the workplace and maintain a level of staffing that values different backgrounds and perspectives, BUT, is this the right thing to do???

However, many companies still struggle with creating equitable systems for layoffs when facing mass redundancies. According to a recent survey from Korn Ferry Institute, two thirds of respondents said their organisations were not prepared for potential job losses due to their lack of succession planning or ability to reallocate resources quickly enough.

When it comes to protecting the diversity metrics of a company while at the same time minimising damage associated with mass layoffs, employers need to ensure they have adequate systems in place beforehand, as well as focus on creating an equitable system for deciding who gets laid off and who stays employed during these times.

Overall, companies must take care to ensure they are not discriminating against any particular group when making decisions about layoffs and reductions in force. By following best practices and taking steps to ease the transition for affected employees, companies can minimise disruption while still achieving their business goals.

Do you Agree or Disagree...it's important to consider diversity metrics when making redundancies

I'm 100% on the fence with this one, however from research over the past few months, MANY agree that it is important to consider the impact on diversity metrics when making redundancies; this means that companies must take into account any potential bias in their decisions and ensure that redundancies are not disproportionately affecting certain groups, such as women, underrepresented or minority groups.

Having a diverse workforce can help create competitive advantages (I agree) for businesses, as it allows them to tap into new ideas and perspectives (I agree). It also helps create a workplace where everyone feels welcome and respected (I agree). Therefore, it is essential for companies to make redundancy decisions in a way that preserves and fosters diversity within their organisation (I disagree, as this is then non-inclusive to other groups).

Companies do however, need to be aware, that redundancy decisions can have legal implications if they are made with bias or discrimination towards certain protected groups. Therefore, considering diversity metrics (but doing so without bias) when making redundancies is a key step to ensuring both legal compliance and an inclusive workplace environment.

Organisations should take steps to ensure that their redundancy processes are fair and transparent, such as using objective criteria for selection, avoiding subjective decision making, and providing adequate training for those heavily involved in the process. Employers should also consider how their own biases may affect their judgement when making redundancy decisions.

After seeing many great examples of people being let go respectfully with due care and attention, and also equal amounts being let go with appalling processes (or lack there of), it is also important to be aware of potential discrimination during any redundancy process. Employers must not discriminate against employees based on protected characteristics such as age, gender, race or disability. If employers do not take steps to avoid discrimination in their redundancy processes, they could face legal action from employees who feel they have been unfairly treated.

Overall, it is essential for organisations to be aware of potential bias in redundancy decisions in order to make sure that all employees are treated fairly and equally, and in the past 3-4 months, this has not always been the case. By taking steps to ensure fairness and transparency throughout the process, employers can help protect themselves from legal action while ensuring that all employees receive fair treatment.

Lack of Succession Planning and Workforce Planning (WFP) ultimately causes mass-redundancies

The issue of mass redundancies is a complex one, with many factors contributing to the need for large-scale layoffs. One factor that can contribute to this problem is a lack of workforce planning when initially hiring. Companies may hire too many employees in anticipation of future growth, or they may hire employees with skills that are not needed in the long run. This can lead to an overabundance of workers and eventually result in mass redundancies, like we are seeing today in many of the globes largest organisations.

In addition, companies may be forced to downsize due to economic downturns or changes in the industry. This can also lead to mass layoffs, as companies are unable to sustain their current workforce levels, real-estate and overheads build over many decades.

It is important for companies to plan ahead when it comes to hiring and ensure that they have the right number of employees for their needs. Proper Workforce Planning can help reduce the chances of having to make mass redundancies in the future, saving both employers and employees from unnecessary hardship.

Succession Planning and Workforce Planning are two important strategies that organisations "should" use to ensure that they have the right number of employees for their needs, both imminent and future. Succession Planning involves identifying potential successors for key positions within an organisation, while Workforce Planning involves anticipating future staffing needs, and ensures that an organisation has the right people in place to meet those needs.

In order to avoid situations like mass-redundancies, companies need to ensure that they have effective Succession Plan in place - including identifying high-potential employees, and making sure they have the necessary skills and training to take on leadership roles in the future - Future Leader Planning. Additionally, companies should create a diverse pipeline of talent so that there is a pool of qualified candidates from which to choose when vacancies do occur. Many companies across the globe have taken steps to build sourcing teams, working hand-in-hand with Talent Acquisition and Recruiting teams to effectively build talent-pipelines for these situations.

By focusing on Succession Planning and Workforce Development, companies can reduce the likelihood of mass redundancies occurring due to a lack of qualified employees, over-hiring and unnecessary hiring.

Steps that employers can take to avoid bias in redundancy decisions

Redundancy decisions can be difficult for employers to make, as they must ensure that the process is fair and unbiased. To avoid bias in redundancy decisions, employers should take the following steps:

1. Follow established processes and procedures: This will often help ensure that all employees are treated equally and fairly throughout the redundancy process.
2. Set fairness as a goal when making redundancy decisions: Employers should strive to make decisions based on objective criteria such as skills, qualifications, experience, attendance record, timekeeping, disciplinary record etc.
3. Ask people to be accurate in their decision-making and challenge those who are not: This will help ensure that all employees are given equal consideration when making redundancy decisions.
4. Instruct yourself to be fair by avoiding any personal biases or preferences when making decisions about redundancies.
5. Consider all available options before deciding on redundancies, such as reducing working hours or offering voluntary redundancies instead of compulsory ones.

By taking these steps, employers can reduce the risk of discrimination claims or legal action, and ensure that their redundancy selection criteria is fair and unbiased.

Conclusion

Organisations should be aware of the risks associated with mass redundancies and take a proactive approach to cost-cutting, risk management, and employee consultation to reduce the likelihood of large-scale layoffs. I'm no expert when it comes to building, owning or running organisations of 50,000, 100,000, 500,000+ employees, but by taking some of the steps above, organisations can create a healthier and more secure workplace while still remaining competitive (and not getting greedy).

Organisations need to be aware that downsizing, or mass redundancies, can have a major impact on their employees and businesses. Poor Succession Planning and Workforce Planning can lead to large-scale layoffs which can result in reduced morale among remaining staff members, damage companies' reputations, and creating an economic ripple effect. NOw, I'm not saying this is not done prior to making 20,000+ people redundant, but prior to mass redundancies, companies should look at all possible ways of reducing costs; this could include cutting non-essential expenses, reducing overhead costs, or negotiating better deals with clients, customers, partners and suppliers.

Not many organisations (from what I've seen) engage in meaningful consultation with employees when considering redundancies. This would ensure that the employees are given adequate notice to find alternative employment or explore other alternatives such as reduced hours or pay cuts etc. By taking these proactive steps companies can reduce the likelihood of mass redundancies and ensure that any decisions made are fair and responsible for everyone involved!

SOURCES

• https://www.bls.gov/mls/
• https://digiday.com/media/a-big-reset-in-2023-after-big-techs-mass-layoffs-job-candidates-face-intense-competition/
• https://hbr.org/2018/05/layoffs-that-dont-break-your-company
• https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/how-to-guides/pages/conductlayofforrif.aspx
• https://www.insperity.com/blog/laying-off-employees/
• https://www.eeoc.gov/employers/small-business/6-i-need-lay-employees
• https://www.bls.gov/mls/
• https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/25/success/mass-layoffs-how-to-let-someone-know-they-lost-their-job/index.html
• https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardnieva/2022/12/23/what-tech-layoffs-mean-for-2023/
• https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/redundancy
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundancy_(engineering)
• https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/redundancy
• https://www.thepeoplespace.com/ideas/articles/want-avoid-unconscious-bias-redundancy-treat-it-recruitment-campaign
• https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/multipage-guide/avoiding-unlawful-discrimination-when-making-redundancy-decisions
• https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/work/leaving-a-job/redundancy/check-if-your
• https://petaurumsolutions.co.uk/blog/top-tips-to-ensure-a-fair-redundancy-selection-criteria/
• https://pearnkandola.com/diversity-and-inclusion-hub/bias/five-ways-to-reduce-bias-in-decision-making
• https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/multipage-guide/avoiding-unlawful
• https://everstream.net/knowledge-base/the-difference-between-diversity-and-redundancy/
• https://blog.advantagecg.com/connection-advantage-blog/advantage-blog/2017/2/16/network-redunancy-and-diversity-whats-the-difference
• https://www.inap.com/blog/network-redundancy-vs-network-diversity/