Ashurst revenues down by 7 per cent

  • Print
  • Comments (1)

Readers' comments (1)

  • The firm has shed many more staff than the publicised redundancies - mainly with creative use of poor performance reviews and compromise agreements. Staff lost in this manner are not included in the redundancy headcount and so the firm is not portrayed in such a bad light as, say, Linklaters who shed over 250 jobs and ended up with this figure broadcast on national TV news!
    When calculating job losses, we should add these losses to the redundancy figures. Or ignore the method of staff loss altogether and simply publish the amount of staff in 2007 and the amount of staff in 2008. The difference being the amount of staff shed (by whatever means).

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (1)