Stop the retrenchments @ Absa

**Just Gone** · 03-Apr-12, 04:06 PM

Sorry you are way off track - I have a friend that works for / with Ramos and how she is going about it really sucks!

**Citizen X** · 03-Apr-12, 04:17 PM

The concept of the greater good of the future existence of the company as opposed to the lesser evil of retrenchment is a tough one! On the one hand they saying if x amount of people don't go the entire future of the company is at stake and on the other hand that if a certain percentage of staff are retrenched it will be for the greater good of the company. Again, I really don't know! Whilst retrenchment is equally compelling for all retrenched, I think it's more heart wrenching for the mum and dad who have no other experience , no qualifications and a family to support. I think all you guys raise important points!

**Blurock** · 03-Apr-12, 04:40 PM

Should staff be marched out of the building by security staff when they are retrenched?

Are retrenchments really necessary when your executive earn R20.7 million p.a.?

**tec0** · 03-Apr-12, 10:51 PM

Originally Posted by Blurock

Should staff be marched out of the building by security staff when they are retrenched?

Are retrenchments really necessary when your executive earn R20.7 million p.a.?

Looking at ABSA only now, I would say no, retrenchment on this level is bad and one can only question why the government doesn’t get involved but the people are. Fact is many people will be closing there ABSA accounts because of this make no mistake.

South Africans will not take this action lightly but sadly that is all we can do... close our accounts and soon. There is nothing more we can do.

**adrianh** · 03-Apr-12, 11:51 PM

So, prevention is better than cure, if you don't employ the people in the first place them you don't need to retrench them then do you.

**tec0** · 04-Apr-12, 08:03 AM

Agreed however, ABSA needs to consider the fact that they are still primarily dependant on South Africans and if this is how they repay South Africans for their loyalty then you just know that South Africans will not take kindly to this.

**Blurock** · 04-Apr-12, 08:28 AM

Originally Posted by adrianh

So, prevention is better than cure, if you don't employ the people in the first place them you don't need to retrench them then do you.

How can you have a business without employing people? (I am not talking about our home based businesses which is basically just playing around for pocket money).

A lesson from ancient times;
A potter discovers clay and starts making beautiful, functional pots. By not employing people, he has to stop working to go dig for the clay. He then has to make the pot, stop work to fire the kiln and then bake the clay pots. He's lucky if he makes one pot per day.

By employing people, he can now work on new designs and show his staff how to make the pots. Some staff will be allocated to finding clay and others to fire the kiln or deliver pots to his customers. The multiplier effect provides him with enough pots to trade for livestock, skins and building materials. His workers also benefit as they share in the prosperity created.

Being a master of his art, the potter will eventually dabble into objets d'art and make even more money. He will have time to do this as he has staff taking care of the mundane work which frees him up to use his brain.

**Petrichor** · 04-Apr-12, 08:36 AM

The sad reality is that ABSA will not realise any long term benefits through these retrenchments. Sure, they will have some cost savings in terms of salary costs in the short term, but the impact on productivity and staff morale will have a profound impact on their business as a whole, not even mentioning the damage it does to their brand and client perception. It's a lose-lose situation if you ask me.

**Blurock** · 04-Apr-12, 09:00 AM

Absa used to be a proud South African institution with friendly, competent staff. It has won many accolades for best bank, best place to work etc.

The rot started when Nallie Bosman left. Nallie started as a teller and eventually became CEO. He understood the pressure on staff and introduced many morale boosting incentives which had a positive impact on productivity. After he left the staff profit share incentive was first to go. (this incentive went down to the lowest levels, including cleaning staff).

When Barclays took over, morale dropped and gained momentum. Barclays is totally different and un-South African.

**tec0** · 04-Apr-12, 12:58 PM

Sadly this is a window into our future. Fact is people cannot work there way up anymore. And again ~~labour brokers~~ are partly responsible for that as well. No permanent employees means no promotions or any advancement of any kind ever again.

ABSA became a clear example of this fact. They don't use ~~labour brokers~~ yet but I can see this happening as they can scale up and scale down at leisure and we will suffer for it. So one gets harsh and bitter but can you really blame anyone for the frustration?

The answer is no, you cannot blame people to fight for permanent work and the need for labour laws. Without it profit at ALL cost will get an old meaning back. An example is a man a mile philosophy whereby there will be a fatality at every single mile.