General Options for Reducing Staffing Costs - Revision history

Mkille at 23:50, 13 August 2013

2013-08-13T23:50:42Z

Ali: categorized

2010-07-06T20:54:48Z

categorized

Rfs at 16:18, 2 November 2007

2007-11-02T16:18:04Z

Rfs: /* Voluntary Leaves of Absence */

2005-02-27T15:50:58Z

Voluntary Leaves of Absence

Shawn at 22:58, 25 February 2005

2005-02-25T22:58:04Z

Rfs: /* The Options */

2005-02-24T17:06:52Z

The Options

Rfs: /* Thinking about the costs */

2005-02-24T17:06:15Z

Thinking about the costs

Rfs: /* The Options */

2005-02-24T17:06:02Z

The Options

Rfs at 17:02, 24 February 2005

2005-02-24T17:02:51Z

Rfs: /* Temporary vs. Permanent Layoffs */

2005-02-24T01:34:58Z

Temporary vs. Permanent Layoffs

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:50, 13 August 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	'''This page left for historical purposes.''' -- [[User:Mkille\|Mkille]] ([[User talk:Mkille\|talk]]) 16:50, 13 August 2013 (PDT)
		+
	== Current Situation ==		== Current Situation ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:54, 6 July 2010
Line 97:		Line 97:

	So all that leads to some pretty fuzzy math. But remaining open for some holidays would probably increase our income somehow or other.		So all that leads to some pretty fuzzy math. But remaining open for some holidays would probably increase our income somehow or other.
		+
		+	[[Category:Accounting]]
		+	[[Category:HR]]

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 === Attrition ===
-Attrition works like a hiring freeze. Without laying people off we wait for them to quit or reduce hours in their own time. We have [[Hiring and Job Calendar|a timeline]] that tells us when we might expect attrition. For attrition to work, the existing collective members (and volunteers) need to be able to do the work that was being done by the folks who leave.
+Attrition works like a hiring freeze. Without laying people off we wait for them to quit or reduce hours in their own time. We have [[HR Calendar|a timeline]] that tells us when we might expect attrition. For attrition to work, the existing collective members (and volunteers) need to be able to do the work that was being done by the folks who leave.
 * Clout's Store Internship ends at the end of March. Not re-upping it save $700.

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 === Voluntary Leaves of Absence ===
-This would be more of a temporary cost-cutting measure than a permanent solution, but it could help.
+This would be more of a temporary cost-cutting measure than a permanent solution, but it could help. It should be noted that some of the problems with a temporary layoff do not apply to a voluntary leaves of absence since the time frame would be set by the staff person taking the leave. For shorter time frames many of those problems are also reduced. Of course, the cost saving benfefits are also less.
 === Layoffs ===

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 * If all of the voluntary hours cuts went into effect, what areas of Free Geek would need to be covered?
 * Who would be left to cover those areas?
 === Layoffs ===

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:06, 24 February 2005
Line 13:		Line 13:

	== The Options ==		== The Options ==
		+	(There may be more that what is listed here. Add options as they come up.)
		+
	=== Attrition ===		=== Attrition ===

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 Based on our projections, if we find a way to save enough money, how long until we expect our income has risen enough roll back our cuts? Whether or not we have an estimated time frame, we should identify the goals that would allow us to end the cutback. These goals would need to be based on a budget that is in line with our projections.
-== Thinking about the costs ==
+== Thinking about the Costs ==
 Each options costs us something. For instance, a layoff might raise unemployment, and require us to pay out unspent vacation days. That's the money cost. It would also require us to cover the work of the laid off person or cut programs. That's another kind of cost. For each option, we should mention its estimated costs.

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:06, 24 February 2005
Line 8:		Line 8:

	Based on our projections, if we find a way to save enough money, how long until we expect our income has risen enough roll back our cuts? Whether or not we have an estimated time frame, we should identify the goals that would allow us to end the cutback. These goals would need to be based on a budget that is in line with our projections.		Based on our projections, if we find a way to save enough money, how long until we expect our income has risen enough roll back our cuts? Whether or not we have an estimated time frame, we should identify the goals that would allow us to end the cutback. These goals would need to be based on a budget that is in line with our projections.
		+
		+	== Thinking about the costs ==
		+	Each options costs us something. For instance, a layoff might raise unemployment, and require us to pay out unspent vacation days. That's the money cost. It would also require us to cover the work of the laid off person or cut programs. That's another kind of cost. For each option, we should mention its estimated costs.

	== The Options ==		== The Options ==

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 Based on our projections, if we find a way to save enough money, how long until we expect our income has risen enough roll back our cuts? Whether or not we have an estimated time frame, we should identify the goals that would allow us to end the cutback. These goals would need to be based on a budget that is in line with our projections.
-== Attrition ==
+== The Options ==
 Attrition works like a hiring freeze. Without laying people off we wait for them to quit or reduce hours in their own time. We have [[Hiring and Job Calendar|a timeline]] that tells us when we might expect attrition. For attrition to work, the existing collective members (and volunteers) need to be able to do the work that was being done by the folks who leave.
@@ Line 21: / Line 22: @@
 Through attrition alone (without hiring replacements) we would save in the ballpark of $5,075, but less than $2,000 is scheduled to happen before June. This means that attrition alone will not solve our problems, but measure we take now might be temporary (if we can absorb the jobs of these people into the remaining collective members as these folks quit or reduce their hours).
-== Wage Cuts ==
+=== Wage Cuts ===
 Current salaries are around $28,000 per month (including benefits). A reduction of $5,000 equates to around 18% of that total. I work 32 hours per week and my base pay is $1,440. That makes my hourly rate about $10.35 per hour. An 18% reduction would drop that to $8.50 -- still above minimum wage. My new base wage would be aroundy.d $1,180 and my take home would be substantially less than that. We would need to determine how much of a cut each individual can afford and take the smallest number to determine a cut that would work with everybody.
-== The effect of swapping jobs around ==
+=== The effect of swapping jobs around ===
 Swapping jobs between existing staff members does little to directly address the problem, but it does allow us to take certain measures we might otherwise not be able to. For instance, if Matthew is willing to swap hours but not quit and Jhasen is willing to reduce his hours but we can't afford to let him, swapping would allow us to consider moving Matthew into fill Jhasen's shoes and someone else to pick up the slack that Matthew's absence would create. (That's just an example.)
-== Voluntary Hours Cuts ==
+=== Voluntary Hours Cuts ===
 More data is needed. We need to find out from the survey how many people are willing to sacrifice how many hours of their schedule.
@@ Line 41: / Line 42: @@
 * Who would be left to cover those areas?
-== Layoffs ==
+=== Layoffs ===
 A 32 hour collective member with health care costs about $2,000 per month. A 20 hour collective member without health care costs about $1,100 per month.
@@ Line 58: / Line 59: @@
 * If we drop a member from our health care plan, what affect does it have on the health care for other members?
-=== Temporary vs. Permanent Layoffs ===
+==== Temporary vs. Permanent Layoffs ====
 Permanent layoffs are fairly straightforward propositions, albeit harsh ones for the people being laid off.
@@ Line 70: / Line 71: @@
 * What if during the layoff period, Free Geek's direction changes enough that the temporarily laid off worker doesn't fit into the new programs as well as s/he fit into the old way we did things?
-== Eliminate or Restructure Some Holidays ==
+=== Eliminate or Restructure Some Holidays ===
 Depending on weekends fall there are between 13 and 17 holidays on Free Geek's schedule. The average is 14.5, unless you add in closing early for Christmas Eve and New Years Eve, in which case the average is 15.5 days per year. I'll start with 15 as a round number.

@@ Line 68: / Line 68: @@
 * What happens if things get better? At what point do consider hiring someone back? (We might find ourselves tempted to hire back too soon, leading to a rollercoaster ride for the laid off worker.)
 * Imagine that a worker is doing an adequate but not exceptional job, we lay them off, things eventually get better, do we have to / want to hire them back? How does this interact with staff reviews and staff discipline policy?
 == Eliminate or Restructure Some Holidays ==