Skip to main content

Employers Struggling to Manage Their Workforce During Pandemic...Now What?


Unfortunately, many employers around the country are likely dealing with the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on their businesses, workforces, and overall longterm future of their companies.  That has resulted in many employers having to make the difficult decision between cutting employee hours (or laying off employees altogether) to keep the lights on or instead shutting down indefinitely in hopes of riding things out until things return to normal.  With that comes the decision over what to do with a suddenly bloated workforce and potential glutton of employees without enough work to justify keeping everyone working "business as usual" while still managing to pay the bills.  Below are a few suggestions for how employers can manage the situation.

While this reference is not the definitive guide to the topic and not intended to serve as legal advice (those experiencing a similar situation should consult their HR representative and/or employment law attorney for guidance), it provides a framework that can be referred to when needed.


At the outset, I will note that if an employer has an employment contract with a worker or there is a collective bargaining agreement in place, I would defer to those terms on how to proceed.  This resource is intended more for those that have at will workers.

Take a Realistic Approach at Your Company's Outlook

We could spend all day talking about how long the coronavirus pandemic will be dominating the news cycle, shutting down certain business (either by choice or by a local/statewide ordinance), and requiring social distancing.  Whether this goes on for another few weeks or months, I would suggest employers take a realistic look at how a prolonged shutdown (or partial shutdown) will impact their business and cashflow.  Can you survive with 25% less revenue?  50% less revenue?  100% less revenue?  Or even operate at a loss for the foreseeable future?  Depending what your realistic look is going forward should dictate what to do with your present workforce.  Remember, as much as it might be preferred to remain fully staffed, would doing so result in having to close the business entirely because you cannot manage to make payroll?  Perhaps shutting down for a few weeks, letting a few employees go, or scaling back work hours would go a long way in ensuring there is enough money left to pay bills, make payroll, and keep the lights on for the foreseeable future without mortgaging the future of the company.

Hourly Employees

Assuming you have decided to keep all hourly employees on, let us consider a few things.  Are you able to keep everyone's hours at normal levels?  (Depending the industry, this might be possible.  For instance, those in the grocery, healthcare, or delivery business likely have more than enough work to do right now.  For those in other industries, such as clerical work, the service industry, or certain white collar jobs, work and available work hours might be curtailed.)  If keeping everyone's hours the same will lead to risking making payroll, I do not think that would be the best decision.

Instead, is it possible to cut hours in order to keep everyone employed?  If not, perhaps letting some hourly employees go while retaining others is a more feasible option.  Who to let go and retain will vary, depending on the job, training, workplace, etc.  However, I would suggest keeping those hourly workers that have been cross trained (or are capable of doing so), in order to have them juggle a few new tasks/responsibilities while still keeping things running as smoothly as possible.

Salaried Employees

Assuming you have decided to keep all salaried employees, let us consider a few things.  Are you able to have enough work to keep everyone busy, without sitting around with nothing to do?  (As with hourly employees, depending the industry, this might be possible.  For instance, those in the food service industry, such as managers, might be able assume the work of some hourly employees that have been let go.  Or in a white collar job such as an attorney's office, perhaps a seasoned paralegal or attorney might be able to assume the work of some hourly legal assistants or paralegals that have been let go.)  If keeping all salaried employees will lead to risking making payroll, I do not think that would be the best decision.

Instead, is it possible to convert some salaried employees to hourly to keep everyone employed?  This might not be a popular decision for some workers, but if that results in them retaining their job, it might not be a bad option to consider.  If it is not possible to convert some salaried employees to hourly employees (or the salaried employee does not want to do it), perhaps letting some salaried employees go is a more feasible option.  (Again, we are operating under the assumption that this must be done in order to keep the company running and being able to make payroll.)  As with hourly employees, who to let go and retain will vary depending on the job, training, workplace, etc.  I would suggest keeping those salaried workers that have been cross trained (or are capable of doing so), in order to have them juggle new tasks/responsibilities while still keeping things running as smoothly as possible.

Setting Expectations

Now comes one of the tougher parts of any employers job:  letting a worker go.  Before talking with the employee, I would suggest deciding how you want to frame the end of the employment relationship.  Is the employee being let go, furloughed, or terminated?  Is there a chance for the employee to come back when things eventually turn around or is that not something that is in the cards?  Regardless of what you, the employer, want to do in the future with the departing employee, I would suggest being honest and upfront.  When you decide you are going to let an employee go, decide what you are going to tell them.  If you do not think you can retain them and still make payroll, let them know.  (That is better than the employee thinking their job performance is lacking.)  If you think the employee did a great job and would be open to having them come back when things improve, let them know.  If this is the end of the road and there is little to no chance of their position becoming available again, let them know.  If you are willing to give the employee a recommendation, let them know.  As always, each situation is different, but I would like to think we are all adults here and can be honest and upfront without sugarcoating things and being vauge.  Your (former) employee will appreciate it.

Planning For An Employee's Exit

In this instance, let us assume you have decided to let an hourly or salaried employee go.  I would suggest having a plan in place on how to handle an employee's exit from your company/workplace.  Are you going to have enough remaining workers to pick up the slack?  Are you going to stagger the exits of employees by letting employees go in stages (over a few days, weeks, etc.)?  The last thing you would want to do is keep the business running, suddenly reduce your workforce by XYZ% and then struggle to keep the business running without a proper plan in place.  While this might not be an option (depending how your cashflow is), it is something to keep in mind.

As well, that plan can include having someone else present (such as an HR representative) when the employee is let go.  (If possible, I would suggest having the discussion with the employee in person, rather than via text, e-mail, phone call, etc.)  Having someone else present can help protect the employer in case a dispute later arises about the end of the employment relationship.  As always, I would suggest documenting the conversation with the employee shortly after it occurs.  Details such as what was said, how the employee reacted, and any questions/comments that were raised by the employee would be useful to record.

In addition, when letting an employee go, I would suggest collecting any keys, access cards, log in information, etc that the employee might have.  (The last thing any employer wants is to have an employee that is no longer employed retaining access to the workplace/online log in/etc.)  As well, while every situation is different, after the employee is let go, I would have them leave the workplace rather than returning to their desk/work area.  While I would like to assume that the employee that was let go would not do anything malicious, why chance it?  If it is necessary to have security escort the employee out, that might be something for an employer to consider.

Managing the Remaining Workforce

For those workers that were not let go, many might be apprehensive about their future, the future of the company, etc.  Perhaps a brief team meeting would be useful to get everyone on the same page.  While a step by step breakdown of why a certain employee (or employees) were let go is not necessarily needed, it might be beneficial to give a broad overview.  

  • For instance:  "John Doe was let go this morning, but not fired.  As you all know, things are slowing down a bit here at XYZ Company given the coronavirus situation.  Because of that, I have had to make the difficult decision to let John go in order to be able to make payroll and keep our current staff employed here.  That means we are going to have Suzie Creamcheese and Joey Bananas help pick up the slack and help with the responsibilities that John had.  As I mentioned to John when I talked to him this morning, he is welcome to come back when things get back to normal.  I hope he does because he is a hard worker.  In the meantime, we will all need to be working in order to keep things running but I am confident that with our strong team, we can get things back on track soon."
Having a team meeting can help stave off rumors about why an employee was let go.  Again, being upfront and honest with the remaining workforce is a good way to not let rumors run rampant.  The sooner the remaining workforce can be reassured and encouraged to keep diligently working, the better it will be to manage morale.

Preparing For the Rebound

At some point, things will return to business as usual and things will get back on track.  As noted above, when that will be is hard to say (it not impossible to predict right now.)  However, this is a good time to assess your staffing needs and determine where you will need more workers.  Maybe you were overstaffed in one area and understaffed in another.  This is a good time to take a realistic look at what areas of your business will need workers first once things rebound.  Perhaps it would be a good idea to start filling those positions first and then moving to less essential positions as things get better.  Does this mean bringing back some former employees that were let go or would the business be better served going with a new employee?  As always, every situation is different, but now is a good time to take a realistic look at things and create a plan of action.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per