>>What, in your experience would lead a liquidator to retain a significant number of employees
There's so many things that it would be impossible to give a list. It can be everything from those keeping the office running, customer support through to handymen, never mind the airline operational side.
25% in itself isn't a lot, it depends on how long for. Once there is nobody on holiday and thus no operational activities then there it is down to the receivers to work out the best way of preserving or realising value from what is remaining. So for so many people you'd expect it to be very short term unless part of the business will be sold as an operation.
There are always inaccuracies in the number of people around, but that's no biggie in the scheme of things. The fraught part is deciding which group people are in - though again it will depend on the timescales concerned.
It's fairly easy to justify keeping aircrew but not keeping sales staff. And, within reason, even if one gets the numbers wrong, it is typically not an employment issue.
Business needs can justify many things, even including changing contract terms, in the cause of process of receivership/liquidation.
It is much more tricky to justify keeping this member of aircrew but not that member. And it is more than just being right, it is justifying the fairness and appropriateness of the process.
Though it depends on impact; you're not going to get much sympathy if you will simply be retained one week less than someone else, for example.
Also don't forget if any part of the business/operation is sold there is the potential question of TUPE.
Even at times of distress the company still has to consider the normal process, including selection. And if they're going to screw up, it will be here. But usually the receiver does not screw up. It will be the outgoing management if it is anyone.
Don't forget that one of the things which changes is the amount of time that an (ex)employee has to register a claim. I don't remember what it is, but it is not long.
|
