Thursday, 20 June 2019

Job insecurity

It's not caused by leveraged buyouts, apparently. Well, that's put my mind at rest. 'Who says, boss?!' Kim Hoque says, Voice. 'Who?!' Kim Hoque.

Kim Hoque is Professor of Human Resource Management and Associate Editor of the journal Human Relations. He is also an editorial board member for several other respected journals. He has undertaken consultancy and research for Shell UK, the Trades Union Congress and the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

So there!

Right. It's a PR email, blog fan(s).

Leveraged buyouts do not increase redundancies or lead to the introduction of more insecure forms of work, according to new research.

The findings contradict the widely held view that leveraged buyouts - where investors use loans to buy under-performing companies they can then turn around and sell on - regularly lead to rapid job cuts and greater use of agency staff, fixed-term contracts and external contractors.

Particular concerns had been raised that buyouts involving private equity funds, management buy-ins, short-term deals or high levels of debt could lead to a so-called 'buy, strip and flip' approach.

Yet researchers at Warwick Business School, Cass Business School, and Imperial College found jobs were no less secure, even when a leveraged buyout featured a 'perfect storm' of all these factors.

Their findings are reported in the paper, Is Job Insecurity Higher in Leveraged Buyouts? published in the British Journal of Industrial Relations.

Oh, it's not just Kim. / Yeah, the thing is, though ... job insecurity is everywhere these days and getting worse. It doesn't matter what causes it. 'No?' Well, bad people cause it, actually, Voice. And the disaster of a no deal Brexit, or frankly, any Brexit, will ... I don't even want to think about it, dear reader(s)! Listen to me - !!! Fill a suitcase full of diamonds and gold bars, and flee! Save yourselves! 'Is that what you'll be doing, boss?' Me?! I'll be eating cold baked beans, and crying in my room. But I digress. Here's Kim -

Kim Hoque, of Warwick Business School, says: "The labour movement has waged a concerted international campaign to highlight the impact of leveraged buyouts on job security. However, the theory that these buyouts work only in favour of investors, not staff and other stakeholders, does not hold water. In some instances leveraged buyouts may well have led to downsizing and job insecurity, but our analysis suggests these cases are far from the norm."

Okay, okay. But the world is still one big toilet, Kim. Never forget that!


'Boss! Let Mike Wright have the final say!'

Mike Wright, of Imperial College, says: "To set leveraged buyouts up as barbarians at the gates risks constraining activity that could well be the difference between survival and failure for struggling firms. The latter would, of course, be the most devastating in terms of job losses."

Yeah, okay. Whatever!

ENDS - !!!


Anything else, kook(s)? I'm listening to The 10X Rule again. Why? Because Grant Cardone's phrases stick in my mind better than anything else I've listened to - which is the whole point, ain't it? I mean, I'm trying to reprogram myself. / Now, some of you may be thinking, Oh, this is silly. What a waste of time! WRONG - !!! It's something I need, man. Maybe you were born with a positive, go-getting mindset, BUT(!) ... I've always been a nihilistic mofo. Seriously. And it's no good having a great intellect, and great talent, and a superior personality like Julius Caesar IF(!) ... you want to jump into the sea like Bodhi every time you have a small setback. Are you digging me on this? I hope so.