Redundancy Poll

With two of the largest players in my industry undergoing a major restructure, there will be a number of roles made redundant. If given the opportunity, would you take a redundancy package or take on another role offered in your company now (for the same pay)?

Please explain why you chose your option? E.g. if you selected the take redundancy option, it was because you have many years of service under your belt and/or a lot of leave resulting in an attractive payout, it's easy to get a similar job in your industry, you want to start your own business, you can afford to retire early, etc.

Poll Options

  • 30
    Take redundancy package
  • 7
    Take another role offered by company

Comments

  • +2 votes

    If the opportunity arose for me to take redundancy I would absolutely take it as it is easy to get a similar job in my industry and I could do with the payout.

  • +4 votes

    It depends on what your financial circumstances are and your age. Personally I'm begging for a package and I've been told I can't have one, but then I'm older and more financially secure. I think you need to look into what your options are before you make any decisions as the money can be very attractive but you have to be able find another way to make a living. Many of the people I know who have taken a package have struggled to find a postion at the same level; it can set you back for a while.

  • +1 vote

    It realllly depends on so many things… For example, I work for a very large airline in Australia hint hint; i'd say only a small percentage of people that are offered redundancies actually take them. Why? Because amazing working conditions, unions that will go to heaven and earth to ensure you get what you deserve, extremely decent pay compared to similar jobs, flexible hours, 5 weeks annual leave, days in leiu, RDOs, so on and so forth.

    But in saying that, I would take a redundancy any day of the week if it was equivealent to at least 6 months pay, but once again it depends on your financial position and how much you are likely to be paid in another position. I would rather receive 6 months pay, take 3 months off then find another job than not take a redundancy.

  •  

    Agreed with all of the above comments.
    Just want to add - also depend on who lead the team after the merger or acquisition. If your company was acquired, bigger chance your company will have a staff cleansing than the other company.
    Also, depend if you can adapt to change. Things will forever change all merger. Instead of being unhappy with new changes, and leave with nothing. May as well having the money in pocket - at least 6 months salary for the hand shake.
    Again depend on your financial and family situation.

  • +5 votes

    I was in a position a couple of years ago where my company was taken over and 40% of the staff were made redundant.
    At that time, I had accrued the maximum redundancy payout available (16 weeks) and had long service entitlements around 12 weeks.
    But it would have been a disaster for me, as my partner was half way through a uni degree and was bringing no income, we had young kids with lots of demands, so I valued the pretty easy work conditions I had achieved, and I had been getting a bit sloppy about making sure I had alternative employment available.

    I didn't get the arse, but I changed my set up so I would never have that feeling of vulnerability again. The spouse finished her degree and is in full time work, the kids are out of daycare, I have developed my network to be much more confident of finding an alternative job plus I have upped the saving rate so we have a bit more to call on, and I am some way toward developing additional (minor) streams of income.

    If you can get a job easily elsewhere, always take redundancy. It looks fine on the resume "they were in trouble and shedding staff" and you get a cash benefit. If you can't easily find alternative employment, it becomes much more stressful. The longer you are in one place, and the older you get, the more active you need to be to stop slipping into the second group.

  • +1 vote

    they say those which benefit the most out of redundancy are those under a year (cause you get pay out as though u been there a year) and those over 10 years (long service)

    •  

      My old place paid 1 month per year of service, LSL, all accrued sick leave, AL, outstanding RDO's.. No caps. Some long timers came out with close to a million.

  •  

    I took a separation package in 2012 and haven't looked back.

  •  

    I had the choice of taking a redundancy or relocating to India.

    So I took the redundancy.

  •  

    I've been made redundant twice, and both times, although it sucked, I used it to my advantage. I'm not frightened of redundancy now, and I believe I can find another role, so I'll take it if it's offered and is appropriate. But it's devastating for so many people, and I've watched them fall in a heap over it. At my work, we lost three staff recently. My role is safe, but I don't really care either way. I feel more for those who have worked there for years and didn't want to leave.

  • Top