Talk:Layoff
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Organized Labour, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Organized Labour. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. | |
| If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments. |
Contents |
[edit] Comment
While i may agree with some of the points, i challenge the neutrality of this article.
I'd also note that this article is probably redundant with some of our other economics articles. Honestly, it reads like it was written to express anger over being downsized. Pakaran 20:27, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] UK english
I was watching the BBC2 show, The Office, and noticed they did not use the word 'layoff' or 'downsizing', but instead used 'redundencies'. I do not know enough about this usage to add to the article, but feel a sentence or two mentioning this would make the article more global. --Andrew c 14:36, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
- Have a look at Redundancy (law). Richard W.M. Jones 18:42, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Move to Layoff?
Currently Downsizing is the main entry; Layoff redirects to it. Because "Downsizing is a euphemism" I think the article should be moved to Layoff (layoff has no history so this move should not require any admin assistence). Any suggestions or objections? Ewlyahoocom 10:21, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- I agree. I found this article by searching for lay-off.
[edit] Limited geographic scope
I'm tagging this article for limited geographic scope. Comments? --Smithfarm 11:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Not a worldwide view? In what way? Could there be more of a description of the concern?--Dreaded Walrus 20:34, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merged
I've merged together a number of articles including most of those mentioned above. I think it's a lot better now and deals with most of the concerns raised here. I'm not sure what to do with the RIF abbreviations though, are they that important? If not the content could be rewritten, merged into the rest of the article. Ewlyahoocom 21:44, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Streamlining
Why does Streamlining a corporate business term lead to downsizing, granted downsizing is often a side effect of streamlining but it is not synonymious with layoffs or downsizing
Streamlining leads to downsizing which leads to layoff's thats just wrong
- Agreed, I also found that "efficiency expert" redirects here. WTF???
[edit] Too many inserts at beginning
It makes the article not worth reading because it causes the pereception that the article is incorrect in some manner. Remove ASAP.
[edit] Efficiency expert
A search for "efficiency expert" automatically redirected me to this page. This has nothing to do with efficiency experts. I don't know how to fix it. DFurlani 01:31, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. Efficiency expert now redirects to Ergonomics. jnestorius(talk) 01:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
So-called "efficiency experts" are notorious for being brought in to initiate layoffs. For examples, Desk Set or Office Space or The Efficiency Expert. This aspect is not covered at Ergonomics. Ewlyahoocom 02:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Redundancy
The article is mainly about redundancy rather than Lay off, although Redundancy (law) redirects here. Needs a bit of radical editing by someone who udnderstands the legal definition of these terms in English speaking coutries.Billlion 09:31, 19 October 2007 (UTC) what —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.151.21.103 (talk) 19:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
