is it a must to reduce the total number of staff members on payroll to reduce cost?

[Kinglegend01]

Yeah I seriously dont see any thingvwring with laying off workers when you can actually afford to keep paying them all their salaries because if you don't do it at the rift time, you are bound to do at later which will be much more worst because you will have to lay off everyone and possibly lose your business altogether.

 

[Richard92]

Sometimes it might be relevant to reduce the number of workers the when you see that the business is going bankrupt but in some cases it might not be that necessary to reduce workers. it all depends on what the owner of the business loans and the way he or she makes his business reviews

 

[Veetos12]

Business at times deploy some dirty strategies to reduce the cost of production and operations. Decreasing the total amount of on payroll expense can increase the money available to invest in other areas of the business. Most business owner lower their payroll expense which affect the quality of their product and/or service. Decreasing payroll expenses can place extra burden on your remaining employees and cause quality to suffer.

.......what are your views?

This problem of decreasing the amount on the payroll has caused many businesses to stumble and not be able to meet up with keeping their integrity as their quality in the market is easily beaten by a competing manufacturer.

 

[Shayo]

Reducing the amount of staffs may not be the right step especially if the business is not in debt or bankrupt. When the number of staffs is reduced, that means more work for the remaining workers because they would have to fill up the spots and this may cause overworking and reduced output.

 

[Sheun450]

First, you might have to pay the full amount of the advertising up front, and then provide the supplier with a copy of the ad in order to receive a reimbursement for their share of the advertising cost. Second, some suppliers may .

 

[Aniwhyte]

It all depends on the situation at hand, if you reduce the number staff then productivity is sure going to reduce also which might greatly affect your work, and it would eventually becomes slow there by making things worse and your business might be worse off as it were before.

 

[Akinwale701]

Business at times deploy some dirty strategies to reduce the cost of production and operations. Decreasing the total amount of on payroll expense can increase the money available to invest in other areas of the business. Most business owner lower their payroll expense which affect the quality of their product and/or service. Decreasing payroll expenses can place extra burden on your remaining employees and cause quality to suffer.

.......what are your views?

if that is the only available option for a company in order to be able to pay all the members of staff involved, reducing the amount is the next thing but if it can be possible. That more funds can be obtained to foot the bill, it's not a bad thing.

 

[Donkiz]

Reducing the number of staff on your payroll in order to free up some cash for your business should be the last resort while trying to reduce your operating cost. You can try other options and if you are unable to free up the needed amount of money, it's best you convince your staff to take a pay cut than laying some people off, this is because when you lay off a good number of staff, apart from affecting production and putting a more stress on the remaining employees, it equally send a message of a company in distress to the customers and the the public, which might affect your business negatively.

 

[Ralphjoe]

Reducing the total number of staffs on payroll should be the last measure for a company to take if it wants to reduce cost because more workers in a company leads to more work being done in the company and that will also translate to more revenues accrued to the company.

 

[Setho]

In business sometimes unforseen events might arise and as the boss you have to take measures to ensure that the business stays. You do not have to sack or level off employees to do that. First thing to consider is cutting the companies expenses like ongoing and future capital projects that could wait, loan repayment. Leveling of employee should be the last thing you should consider.

 

[Eodine]

I think it depends on the reason why you want to cut the cost, and the initial amount you would like to cut if it is an amount that is not that high and could be replaced by cutting down on variable costs then that would be better.

 

[Ayokex]

Downsizing is not a good solution to reduce cost in an organization. The !post viable reason to lay off staff is when some of the staff are not productive or when the company feel they are overstaffed. If the production capacity of a company is not reduced and company decides to reduce staff so as to cut cost, this will tell negatively on the company performance.

 

[maventiger]

To reduce cost on payroll you have to reduce the amount of staff you have
But mind you if you reduce an employees definitely your productivity will reduce, so you have to think wisely.

@Nicklas22 definitely the companies productivity will reduce but the management aims has been achieved. Reducing payroll cost is always a burden on the working staffs whose daily task could triple if not double on daily basis. Their overall level of contribution to product will reduce but most management care less when using such tactics.

 

[Pattertwig21]

Business at times deploy some dirty strategies to reduce the cost of production and operations. Decreasing the total amount of on payroll expense can increase the money available to invest in other areas of the business. Most business owner lower their payroll expense which affect the quality of their product and/or service. Decreasing payroll expenses can place extra burden on your remaining employees and cause quality to suffer.

.......what are your views?

I've seen a talk by a motivational speaker somewhere where a employer had asked his employees to take unpaid leaves instead of totally cutting them off completely ely (this story happened ages ago, the company is enduring tough times). I think we need to think about ways to help each other during crisis like this. If we can.

 

[Mostee501]

Depends on the production gross. Most business employ similar tactics and are fortunate and others aren't as fortunate. Reducing staff as a means of cost reduction in reality is cost effective until it affects productivity.

 

[unhappy triad]

Considering the fact that this workers actually deserve their pay is enough reason to see why we can't justify it. But if really the business is running at loss opting for payroll cut is not out of context. In this case the business is at risk of shutdown

 

[Sammyesx]

That is a very tight situation for any organization, no organization will want to reduce their staff unless the situation warrant such, vut notwithstanding it should be done strategically so that I t will not affect the productivity of the organization.

 

[Kamon c4]

In order to reduce payroll, two things should be put into consideration. Firstly you’ve to look into alternatives in case of labor downsize. The reason for this is make sure there’s continuous production even after downsize. You have to make sure there’s availability of machineries that could do the work. Labor downsize can only be profitable if there’s alternatives either cheap labor or machines. This will definately reduces cost of production.

 

[EMMANUEL]

It is not a must but what I am actually concern about is that it is better you increase the rate of a task other than reduce total number of a staff member because I could sense that as sacking some set of people just to settle some members payroll.

 

[Sanusi]

I think its not a necessity to work with a large number of employees, so if it is a small worker you want to work with and you guarantee those worker that you will pay them well why not. I think a little number of worker will work effectively.