[RowanH]

In New Zealand we have an absolutely shit employment law process where the company has to 'propose' a restructure (in a formal fashion). Then 'consult' with employees for feedback. Then 'consider' the feedback. And then 99% of the time it's all just the same and people get made redundant.

It is absolutely brutal as it invites the chance of hope during the downsizing - and implies staff will be able to provide alternative suggestions. Which is quite plainly bananas.

It's enshrined in law and if you don't follow the process as an employer you can get taken to task by the governing body around it.

It's just far easier, and less harmful emotionally, to rip the band aid and provide a good package.

[markdown]

> ...and implies staff will be able to provide alternative suggestions. Which is quite plainly bananas.

Why is that bananas? When covid hit my country, the national airline fired ~90% of flight attendants. They had been willing to be put on leave with 0 pay until the airline needed them again, but the airline wasn't interested in that. They were very happy to have an excuse to get rid of these long-serving employees and hire fresh-faced 18-25yr olds on starter salaries in their stead.

Having a mandated process like you mentioned (maybe for companies with more than 50 employees) could have made a massive difference in an instance like this.

The flight attendants in my example eventually all got their jobs back, but only after a years-long legal battle during which some lost their homes and most had a very tough time.

[jopsen]

Might it not depend on the industry?

I've heard of unionized factory workers negotiate lower salaries to keep the shop open. Granted that was Europe.