InGlasCo begins layoffs
- Thread starter Pavel
- Start date
- Status
txomisc
Registered User
this is certainly a major shame. you would think itd be a job where youd feel fairly secure.
when is all this hockey merchandise gonna go on sale so i can stock up on it?
when is all this hockey merchandise gonna go on sale so i can stock up on it?
kenabnrmal
Registered User
I feel terribly for those who lost their jobs, but I really have to question the parent company. Clearly, while the lockout could drag on for some time, either the NHL will return or a replacement league or a competitive league will begin in the not-too-distant future. Is it really necessary to lay off half the staff as opposed to reassigning them somewhere in the company...perhaps a temporary lay off, something non-permanent. Yes, these are the real victims...but based upon the very limited information given, I don't necessarily point the finger at the NHL or the PA, but at the company themselves.
It doesn't sound to me like InGlasCo would do much else
A name like that sounds like they probably just make glass.
And as little as we like to see it they are no worse then any other company. Essentially the lockout has created a recession like effect to any company that provides anything to the NHL. And during a recession many businesses cut costs and lay people off. I don't like the way that do that either, but it a general rule regarding how they perform business in NA.
A name like that sounds like they probably just make glass.
And as little as we like to see it they are no worse then any other company. Essentially the lockout has created a recession like effect to any company that provides anything to the NHL. And during a recession many businesses cut costs and lay people off. I don't like the way that do that either, but it a general rule regarding how they perform business in NA.
kenabnrmal
Registered User
grego said:
They are owned by Drolet, who also owns Sherwood. So they do something else...of course, the Sherwood segment of the company is probably feeling the pinch as well. Still, while as someone with a business degree, I fully understand the nature of the business, it seems to me that with business almost assuredly to rise in the not-so-distant future (SOMETHING is going to take the place of the NHL soonish, if the NHL doesn't return), its just unsavory to have gone to the lengths of layoffs. I understand the premise behind it, but as an observer ignorant of the specifics of their business, I just don't like it.
I have never heard of any company relocating employees like that, to a completely different company, that they own. To most companies it is too much hassle. And honestly many employees may not be interested to work at the other place especially if it is in a different city. Many employees would prefer to be laid off so they can try to collect Unemployement Insurance in a few months. Where if you transfer them to another company and they hate the job and quit. Guess what they quit so they don't get any Unemployment Insurance.
At least it would work that way in Canada with UI. If you get laid off you qualify. If you quit. Too bad for you, in many cases.
At least it would work that way in Canada with UI. If you get laid off you qualify. If you quit. Too bad for you, in many cases.
kenabnrmal
Registered User
grego said:
Thats true, all of it. Transferring, especially to another town, would likely be out of the question. Still, I maintain that with rosier days on the horizon without much doubt, SOMETHING could have been done besides laying these folks off. I could be wrong, but it just leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
rwilson99
Registered User
kenabnrmal said:
Assign them where... to the hockey stick division?
When a company is largely dependent on merchandise sales, in an industry where such sales are down 80%, they need to layoff employees.
Let me guess, you feel that if NHL management were reasonable, hockey would be back in no time.
kenabnrmal
Registered User
rwilson99 said:Assign them where... to the hockey stick division?
When a company is largely dependent on merchandise sales, in an industry where such sales are down 80%, they need to layoff employees.
Let me guess, you feel that if NHL management were reasonable, hockey would be back in no time.
Read the whole thread. I already admitted that transferring was out of the question. As for your "guess", go to hell. I am a management graduate, I fully grasp the options that are availiable to a company that is facing steep losses. All I suggested was that there could have been something else done, especially considering that the losses are virtually guaranteed to be made up in a relatively short period of time. Hell, I even admitted that it was probably unreasonable and that my opinion was based on little but a gut feeling, that I knew little about their actual business, so it should be taken with a grain of salt. Are you so fixated on cheering for your side in this whole labor conflict that you can't take a loose observation for what its worth?
And yes, one possibility would be to reassign them to the hockey stick division, since the deals Sherwood has with the NHL might pale in comparison to the deals they have in the minors and in minor hockey, losses may not be as steep or even existent, and room may be able to be found for 20 employees there, especially for a short period of time. Of course, AS HAS ALREADY BEEN ADMITTED, if its in another city town or for many other reasons, the employees may prefer to be laid off and collect EI.
So as you can see, we were having a nice little civil discussion before you came in with your presumptions and your sarcasm. For the record, I am not on the players side. I'm with neither side given their lack of true negotiation.
Read an entire thread before you start taking shots at someone. Your smart-assedness might make me you feel pretty good about yourself, but it also makes you look like a jerk, and worse yet since that could very well be the truth (hey, I don't know, I'm just throwing the options out there), you send the previously civil thread on a steep slope to lockdown.
PecaFan
Registered User
I don't think it's reasonable to blame the company at all. They held out four or five months, retaining employees when they couldn't afford to keep them. Should they have to keep doing that another 12 months? That's an unfair expectation.
I don't know how the company can hold out for the rosier days. I understand you feeling bad for the employees, no one likes to see them laid off.
At the same time, if you read Bettman and Goodenows comments. Especially the one saying to players be prepared to not work next season what would I think as the executive of a company. If the NHLPA members should take any contract in another league, which may just be posturing ( but as the exec of a company you report to shareholders and if you lose money for 2 years they will fire you )
The company had little choice cut the work force down and save money. The league has given them little choice but to do otherwise.
If by some chance they do start the league this year ( which I doubt ) then the people will only be laid for for a month or so before getting back to their job. Either way, though it is not desirable they have little choice.
They are a business not a charity, and they need to make a profit. The same way NHL teams need to make a profit on their investment
At the same time, if you read Bettman and Goodenows comments. Especially the one saying to players be prepared to not work next season what would I think as the executive of a company. If the NHLPA members should take any contract in another league, which may just be posturing ( but as the exec of a company you report to shareholders and if you lose money for 2 years they will fire you )
The company had little choice cut the work force down and save money. The league has given them little choice but to do otherwise.
If by some chance they do start the league this year ( which I doubt ) then the people will only be laid for for a month or so before getting back to their job. Either way, though it is not desirable they have little choice.
They are a business not a charity, and they need to make a profit. The same way NHL teams need to make a profit on their investment
kenabnrmal
Registered User
Yeah, I fully understand that sometimes a company just reaches a breaking point. Personally, I have the sort of cost-cutting philosophy that personnel cuts should be the last resort, and since there was no indication that this was the case, it leaves me with a sour taste in my mouth. At the same time, I don't know enough about the company to really say one way or the other. I'll just say, I HOPE they had no other option.
Its a shame Trevor Linden is swinning in his private pool, while these poor poor people are gonna be shovleing sidewalks just to make enough to eat for 1 day.
- Status
