Seniority vs Merit

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

When it comes time to get rid of people at a work place, should the employer go by seniority or merit?



Merit Example: Why lay off someone who is an excellent productive worker when some Nebulous who has been there longer but is constantly messing up and not being very productive gets to keep their job.. Doesnt make much sense?



Seniority Example: Why should some new comer get to keep their job over someone who has dedicated several years to their life to this employer?

 

[Kasynlie]

The employer needs to lay off workers in a way which would be most beneficial to the running of the business. Hard-working employees are assets to the business, whereas, those that are consistently screwing up are liabilities. Therefore, the liabilities need to go.

 

[Jazzy]

Last major company I worked for, they laid off all employees that were close to retirement age. The company gave them a pay out package for the number of years they were employed. By accepting this pakage, all of these older employees were no longer able to receive their retirement benefits and lost their health insurance. What a stinking thing to do to people who are of an age where finding new employment is nearly impossible. I resigned from my position after this happened and am glad I did.

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

Well the most fair to the employee's would be to do it by seniority, which is why they typically do it. However when you are on the bottom you probably feel like merit should be the best way to do it. When you are on the top you probably feel like seniority should be the best way to do it.

I think the best way to do it is to exhaust all other options before people lose their jobs. Such as furlough days (everyone takes a couple unpaid days off a year / a month or whatever).. Perhaps makes some cuts at the top... Such as the management takes a pay cut or they reduce the amount of management personnel.