Slaughters to part company with 41 secretaries at end of consultation

Readers' comments (9)

• Anonymous | 7-Nov-2012 5:59 pm

  I question the use of the words "...the firm has been 'forced' to axe 2.4 FTE jobs..."
  
  Who exactly is doing the forcing?

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• John Smith | 8-Nov-2012 1:39 pm

  Anon 5:59PM The forcing is financial pressures. They are not doing it for a laugh. I hope this answers your question.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• RG1 | 8-Nov-2012 2:59 pm

  41 out of 165 is pretty-much exactly 25%. That's a major shedding of the lower-level staff, and a lot more photocopying for the trainees to do...
  Interesting that more secretaries chose to take redundancy than were necessary. Given that replacement jobs are not easy to come by at the moment, either a very generous package was offered, or this says something about their enjoyment of their role at S&M?

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 8-Nov-2012 3:11 pm

  "senior management had a contingency plan in place to ensure it could function with a smaller secretarial team" LOL - presumably this contingency plan includes the secretaries that are left doing double their workload?

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 8-Nov-2012 3:23 pm

  John Smith - Thank you for your facetious comment. No they are not doing it for a laugh, they are doing it to ensure they maintain their level of drawings reagardless of how much revenue the firm brings in.
  I have no problem with them managing their business in this way (after all, they are the owners). I just object to the way the wording of the article appears to absolve the partners of responsibility. S&M is not a high street shop which is 'forced' to make redundancies to fend off bankruptcy - it is the most profitable UK law firm and 'chooses' to make redundancies to maintain that title.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 8-Nov-2012 3:27 pm

  If S&M is suffering from financial pressures then goodness help the rest of us. I am sure that those facing the boot will not be laughing as they read the latest PEP figures.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 9-Nov-2012 12:43 pm

  I have every sympathy for anyone being made redundant in the name of technology, efficiency and PEP. The world of employment is challenging and unforgiving at the best of times.
  My old job was outsourced to India more than 10 years ago and decided a change of career and a fresh challenge is exactly what I needed. Of course I had to make a number of sacrifices, night school and a cut in salary and had to cancel the odd christmas. There is life outside the city you know.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 9-Nov-2012 1:13 pm

  As one of the 41 secretaries, I can say that the package wasn't that generous - but it wasn't bad either. It is more advantageous to the part-timers as they more than likely didn't get affected by the statutory cap of £430 a week. Some of those who applied for voluntary redundancy were close to retirement age and it wasn't worth their while to stay. Others are taking the money and seeking local employment. We took it because it was silly not to - you don't look a gift horse in the mouth, do you?

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 12-Nov-2012 8:35 am

  Not much to stay for as the good old days at the firm have long gone, so sad

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment