Last in first out rule?

lukemed1

Hi guys and gals,

someone told me that employers can't go by the 'last in first out' rule anymore, is this true?

cheers,

jason

[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]

liney

lukemed1 wrote: »

Hi guys and gals,

someone told me that employers can't go by the 'last in first out' rule anymore, is this true?

cheers,

jason

Not soley, as it this could be deemed age discrimination.

However I was told by an employment law solicitor that it was acceptable in a tie break situation between two employees where all other factors are equal.

lukemed1

thanks, so employers don't tend to use this method anymore?

liney

lukemed1 wrote: »

thanks, so employers don't tend to use this method anymore?

Well i wouldn't. There was a case where Rolls Royce used it as part of their criteria and actually won their case, but ET's are expensive and time consuming, so and i would avoid using it where possible.

lukemed1

liney wrote: »

Well i wouldn't. There was a case where Rolls Royce used it as part of their criteria and actually won their case, but ET's are expensive and time consuming, so and i would avoid using it where possible.

ET's?? what's that?

lukemed1

lukemed1 wrote: »

ET's?? what's that?

oh Employment tribunal, thanks

donnajunkie

lukemed1 wrote: »

Hi guys and gals,

someone told me that employers can't go by the 'last in first out' rule anymore, is this true?

cheers,

jason

i dont think many companies are left that would follow the rule anyway. i think the thinking behind it was to show loyalty primarily to people who have been loyal to the company and stayed for a long time. these days there is no loyalty in the workplace. most employers treat their workers like dirt these days.

sdooley

as above, where all other things are equal it's as good a factor as any

tbf, some of the 'performance' factors you see dreamed up are partial and biased with a pre-determined outcome, there's no real fair way to do these things unless you are in a job you can easily measure how many widgets made or sold per hour...

ceridwen

I thought all sorts of things are taken into account these days - skills each person has/sickness record/etc - and that the traditional "last in/first out" criteria is only used when they've allocated points to all these other factors and then two people come out as totally equal points - so the traditional rule is then used as a "last resort" way of deciding who gets the chop.

weths

You can apply the LIFO rule but only if you apply it in every redundancy situation you have. (so if you do it one year you should really be doing it the next time around too) It isnt recommended as you may lose some of your more skilled workforce..but it is a way around paying out huge redundancy packages. (those with less than 2 years service dont get one)

hundredk

If an employer wishes to do so LIFO is legitimate criteria as long as applied fairly and consistently.

However, I think employers recognise that they have to move forward once they have made redundancies and therefore base selection criteria on best/most appropriate skills and individual performance etc. This often (but not always) selects longer standing employees because they have more experience/training/knowledge etc. In practice and as others have said, LIFO can be used as a selection criteria where all other things are equal.