ve the underlying reasons as to why employees are being laid off or if they do, time is not taken to allow for questions or even employees’ input on the matter. Firm B employees are further advanced good layoff packages as a sign of consolation. The employees of company B later file law suits claiming unlawful layoffs while none or just a few from firm A file similar suits (122-23). Firm B fund itself using a lot of resources in the lawsuits over and above the funds and benefits granted to the laid off workers.
The difference in the above outcome was solely based on the approach taken to handle the situation and this is in regards to process fairness. This entails the manager treating the employees fairly and for the employees to feel that they have been treated as so. After the layoffs it was noted that for firm A the productivity increased for those who were left while in firm B it reduced. This therefore means that the employees who were left were affected by either in a positive manner or negatively. Those of firm A increased productivity because they believed that they had a responsibility toward enhancing organisational growth and felt that if they fail to work hard everyone stands to lose in one way or the other. In firm B workers felt that the laying off process was unjust as no much explanation was give and this reduced their morale a great deal (Brockner 123).
As seen above time, resources and productivity was lost simply because the manager in firm B did not take time to be courteous enough to explain the issue at hand or even listen and discuss the situation with employees. The firm also ended up losing a great deal of money in the process. Employees need to feel in such situations their views are taken into consideration as well as their plight. This calls for the management to involve employees in decision making more so in areas that will affect their wellbeing. This scenario is also true with customers who need to feel that they have been