Am not management guru but I'd not touch long standing (10-20 years) staff first.....severance,gratuity etc will cost more than letting go of new comers (3-5 years with the company). of course new comers costs less in the short term (lower pay,less benefits,etc).

Also...this seems to be cost cutting as part of the crisis.....thus measures should be short term till things improve....can management take pay cuts to serve others?

Next,detach yourself from the old flame and extinguish him - its just business after all.

The problem with equality is that we desire that it be with those that have more than us rather that those that have less

Are you sure you know what you are doing? Are you like a receiver manager

You do realize if you terminate the employees,then you will have to pay them all their outstanding salaries plus some amount in lieu of notice (should be 15 days pay for every year of service) or as per their employment contracts.

The 20K max only applies when the company is under liquidation and payments henceforth follow a strict waterfall starting with debentureholders/secured lenders,KRA etc.

And why are you doing the firing,why can't you let management clean up their mess under your supervision so you don't have to look into the eyes of any single moms or ex's.

You sound like someone trying to get help with classwork. Sorry.


I guess if you can't win with facts,you can always pen bile-laced,xenophobic rants to distract everyone.

Save the client. Fire the redundant,non - performing staff!

But you shall remember the LORD your God,for it is He who is giving you power to make wealth,that He may confirm His covenant which He swore to your fathers,as it is this day. Deu 8:18

@ Sasha

I think you still need to do more ASAP. let me give you areas you need to critically analyse.

1. You said the cash leakage is in HR,this is wrong,as of now the cash leakage is all over the company as there is NO PRODUCTION!!!!

2. Your client is not being very clear in what he wants,the best option for him is to go for an immediate receivership in order to safe guard the company's assets,remember the more you have employees around earning free money,the more you are losing an asset called money coz THERE IS NO PRODUCTION!!!!!

3. What PR does your lender want to preserve when you have stated clearly that production stopped.

If I were you I would present the following 2 options to the lender.

a) Go for full receivership and have private guards secure the company's premises immediately,nobody goes in or out. Then commence liqudation procedures.

b) If the lender feels that the company can be revived,then the best thing to do is

i) to send all the staff you have identified as unnecessary on their annual leave.

ii) Review the remaining employees and have all those with unutilised leave days use them up (management always accumulate leave days),

iii) get rid of all casuals.

iv) Re-assign employees to different duties (e.g have the cash accountant moved to GL etc,to reduce incidence of misappropriation,this will also help you identify the least versatile for later culling)

v) Have the lender re-start production immediately before the markets are taken up by competitors,keep production at demand levels to avoid accumulating inventory,but at a minimum above breakeven point to avoid losses.

vi) After all this is done,you can invite directors and work out some restructuring .

I honestly don't understand even how you can be allowed to do all the above without the directors consent,they would either fisrt consent to all the above or the lender would have to place the company under receivership.

The second option almost always never works,good luck



I guess if you can't win with facts,you can always pen bile-laced,xenophobic rants to distract everyone.

@sasha
How can this manufacturing company survive when:
1. Production is zero
2. Casuals are paid equivalent of more than 50% of payroll?

Do they still have products in the market? How is the demand or market share? What is the cost of production and the cost of the 'production waste'? Will firing half the workforce improve the cashflow?

Consider the above and make an informed decision.

The plans of the diligent lead surely to plenty,but those of everyone who is hasty,surely to poverty.