Answers (2)
0
Hello Michel,
I feel for you because you are in a situation over which you have only limited control as it seems. It must be very frustrating when accountants come in and try to tell you how to run a club of your size (for my fellow Americans: 6600 square meters are more the 70,000 square feet).
Rather than throwing out numbers, you need to sit down and determine the different jobs in the club that need to be manned at all times (or parts thereof). I would do this in terms of manhours (for example: having a life guard at the swimming-pool 12 hours every day equals 84 manhours). Do that for every single function and see what you get.
This will put the discussion about layoffs on a different level and the people wanting the layoffs will at least see the impact it creates. I personally would approach that from a safety perspective first. You probably will have to offer a reduction down from 82 because you have to show good faith and have to meet them halfway but you may be able to justify re-hiring or at least preventing further layoffs.
You really have to make a business case for why you need the people. Make sure you also include so-called intangible benefits. Those are service, safety, reputation. Make a case for the damage in reputation (and thus in profit) if something were to happen to one of the members.
Like it or not: your 'foes' are looking at it from the bottom line, and you have to put yourself in their shoes and meet them at their turf.
I wish you good luck; this is a tough problem. If you feel that I can be of further help, you may also contact me at my e-mail address karinsingleton@nc.rr.com.
I feel for you because you are in a situation over which you have only limited control as it seems. It must be very frustrating when accountants come in and try to tell you how to run a club of your size (for my fellow Americans: 6600 square meters are more the 70,000 square feet).
Rather than throwing out numbers, you need to sit down and determine the different jobs in the club that need to be manned at all times (or parts thereof). I would do this in terms of manhours (for example: having a life guard at the swimming-pool 12 hours every day equals 84 manhours). Do that for every single function and see what you get.
This will put the discussion about layoffs on a different level and the people wanting the layoffs will at least see the impact it creates. I personally would approach that from a safety perspective first. You probably will have to offer a reduction down from 82 because you have to show good faith and have to meet them halfway but you may be able to justify re-hiring or at least preventing further layoffs.
You really have to make a business case for why you need the people. Make sure you also include so-called intangible benefits. Those are service, safety, reputation. Make a case for the damage in reputation (and thus in profit) if something were to happen to one of the members.
Like it or not: your 'foes' are looking at it from the bottom line, and you have to put yourself in their shoes and meet them at their turf.
I wish you good luck; this is a tough problem. If you feel that I can be of further help, you may also contact me at my e-mail address karinsingleton@nc.rr.com.
0
Hi Michel. Solid advice from Karin! I'd like to add that you need to get YOURSELF before the real decision-makers as well. Seldom are the "accountants" the actual final decision-makers, and those who are making the decision based on the accountant's advice need to hear from those of you who are actually doing the work and are on the front lines. Accountants are about NUMBERS, not necessarily about OPERATIONS. If the owners of the facility hear from their operations people (you and others) of the negative impact that these decisions will have on their business, they may be more amenable to listen and to not make such drastic changes.
I hope this helps.
LaRue, CSCS
www.lecfitness.com
lecfitness@yahoo.com
I hope this helps.
LaRue, CSCS
www.lecfitness.com
lecfitness@yahoo.com
