In Australia we have a delightful government spin on this process.
It's decided that the civil service needs to be reduced by some factor. With heavy heart, it is decided to do this the humane way: voluntary redundancies are offered to those who want to take them, with a generous severance.
If you've been doing well, great deal! You will get a good reference, and can easily find a new job.
If you've been twiddling your thumbs...uh...no thanks, I'll stay put.
I really appreciate when a solution is so almost-right that it is very, very wrong.
I always thought those voluntary retirement schemes were weird! Another interesting feature of the schemes is that they need to be individually approved by the taxation office,[1], probably because payments under them are tax-free,[2] while 'normal' redundancy payments are often taxed at about 30%.[2]
It's hard to see how it is in the public interest to promote these schemes with tax incentives. It would be interesting to see an official rationale for them.
I experienced this at a network ad agency office I worked for in 2010. Financial crisis of 2008, massive cuts, layoffs, etc. Everybody who was a go getter with qualifications took off, leaving the bottom barrel people at their posts. Since the agency had some guaranteed work from network wide contracts, it never closed up shop, but by the time I was hired on, it was the blind leading the blind.
It's decided that the civil service needs to be reduced by some factor. With heavy heart, it is decided to do this the humane way: voluntary redundancies are offered to those who want to take them, with a generous severance.
If you've been doing well, great deal! You will get a good reference, and can easily find a new job.
If you've been twiddling your thumbs...uh...no thanks, I'll stay put.
I really appreciate when a solution is so almost-right that it is very, very wrong.