Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Mega

Kpmg Go To A 4 Day Week

Recommended Posts

No surprise really everyone expected it.

Lower wage costs and also lowers the tax take.

How long can Ponzi Brown keep the civil service running with all hands on deck. The govt should now be looking at slashing costs in line with the new economic activity.

Luckily Ponzi Brown has no grasp on reality so everyone gets to keep their jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KPMG is trying to avoid compulsory redundancies because it wants to be well placed for when the recovery comes.

Yup, the golden rule for every recession is "Never, Ever EVER, sack a manager", and they are all managers in KPMG, aren't they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TBH - this seems pretty sensible of KPMG. It says in the article they want to avoid sacking good people just because their work has turned down. Better to share the pain around - as long as it is done fairly.

I used to work for one of their competitors and I well remember in 1993/4 coming into the office one day and finding 20% of my colleagues had been sacked. The way they did it was shocking. They just ran their finger down the employee list and asked who was not actually out of he office working on a client billed project today. Anyone who by sheer chance who did not happen to be on a job that day got sacked even if they had been working solid for the last six months.

Lots of good people were culled and then they recruited a load more just two years later at great expense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TBH - this seems pretty sensible of KPMG. It says in the article they want to avoid sacking good people just because their work has turned down. Better to share the pain around - as long as it is done fairly.

I used to work for one of their competitors and I well remember in 1993/4 coming into the office one day and finding 20% of my colleagues had been sacked. The way they did it was shocking. They just ran their finger down the employee list and asked who was not actually out of he office working on a client billed project today. Anyone who by sheer chance who did not happen to be on a job that day got sacked even if they had been working solid for the last six months.

Lots of good people were culled and then they recruited a load more just two years later at great expense.

It's different this time.

The sackings will come later when they realise there is no upturn for their particular breed of parasitism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The way they did it was shocking. They just ran their finger down the employee list and asked who was not actually out of he office working on a client billed project today. Anyone who by sheer chance who did not happen to be on a job that day got sacked even if they had been working solid for the last six months.

And they consulte for other companies? :o

Peter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big 4 accountancy firms have large "change management" departments, where they will advise clients on how to manage a merger/takeover without losing all their staff.

What were - possibly - the two most unhappy mergers of the last 10 years?

1. Price Waterhouse with

2. Coopers & Lybrand; and

3. Deloitte & Touche with

4. Arthur Andersen

Notice any familiar names there? Change management... There's scarcely a former Deloitte & Touche employee left in the tax practice at the new Deloitte. All sh04ted by Andersen s41tes.

And yes, the marketing we are getting is amazing. Constant breakfasts, drinks, lunches etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TBH - this seems pretty sensible of KPMG. It says in the article they want to avoid sacking good people just because their work has turned down. Better to share the pain around - as long as it is done fairly.

I used to work for one of their competitors and I well remember in 1993/4 coming into the office one day and finding 20% of my colleagues had been sacked. The way they did it was shocking. They just ran their finger down the employee list and asked who was not actually out of he office working on a client billed project today. Anyone who by sheer chance who did not happen to be on a job that day got sacked even if they had been working solid for the last six months.

Lots of good people were culled and then they recruited a load more just two years later at great expense.

That's what happened when I was working in the Big 4 in the early '90s. May have been the same one! They made a big mistake though as 2 of the people they sacked happened to be on maternity leave. They settled out of court in the end I heard.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My old employer! This is big news!

I think it will appeal to a lot of people though as a lot of them are on decent wages and would welcome a long weekend. Its an interesting plan though, and the only downside would be the message that it sends out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No surprise really everyone expected it.

Lower wage costs and also lowers the tax take.

How long can Ponzi Brown keep the civil service running with all hands on deck. The govt should now be looking at slashing costs in line with the new economic activity.

Luckily Ponzi Brown has no grasp on reality so everyone gets to keep their jobs.

The problem with cutting civil servants is that they would just have to be paid benefits instead. If you want to make a difference they have to be employed in a productive activity, and there's not much of that around at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest theboltonfury
This is stunning news!

The other 'big 3' are sure to follow..

:o

In the IT recesssion of 2001 this lot had benches the size of Southend Pier.

They were shocking. Often you'd pay £1500 per day to have a recent 'grad' turn up and try and turn around your management team. I don't know how they ever got away with it

Edited by theboltonfury

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a surprise but I think it is indicative that their business model and that of the lawyers is probably bust. They charge school leavers out at £100/hr and have the temerity to tell us that is cheap!

Each of the big 4 in the UK have hundreds of partners all making average profits of between £500k and £1m each. These guys collective income probably exceeds that of the directors of the FTSE350, from whom they earn their living.

We are currently putting a failrly large piece of work out to tender to 2 of the big 4 and are about to tell each of them that their tender is correct in terms of scope but 50% too high in terms of fees - it will be interesting to see if they walk away (like they did in the boom times) or come back with a more realistic fee arrangement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not a surprise but I think it is indicative that their business model and that of the lawyers is probably bust. They charge school leavers out at £100/hr and have the temerity to tell us that is cheap!

Each of the big 4 in the UK have hundreds of partners all making average profits of between £500k and £1m each. These guys collective income probably exceeds that of the directors of the FTSE350, from whom they earn their living.

We are currently putting a failrly large piece of work out to tender to 2 of the big 4 and are about to tell each of them that their tender is correct in terms of scope but 50% too high in terms of fees - it will be interesting to see if they walk away (like they did in the boom times) or come back with a more realistic fee arrangement.

They will come back. We just took 50% off a legal bill without really trying

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not a surprise but I think it is indicative that their business model and that of the lawyers is probably bust. They charge school leavers out at £100/hr and have the temerity to tell us that is cheap!

Each of the big 4 in the UK have hundreds of partners all making average profits of between £500k and £1m each. These guys collective income probably exceeds that of the directors of the FTSE350, from whom they earn their living.

We are currently putting a failrly large piece of work out to tender to 2 of the big 4 and are about to tell each of them that their tender is correct in terms of scope but 50% too high in terms of fees - it will be interesting to see if they walk away (like they did in the boom times) or come back with a more realistic fee arrangement.

If you could update the thread when they make a decision, I would be really really grateful.

They will come back. We just took 50% off a legal bill without really trying

Yet people will still insist that we are heading for a hyperinflationary holocaust! :rolleyes:

I negotiate fees in my industry sector, and we certainly aren't getting away with hiking costs. I just get told where to go.

Downward pressure on costs is overwhelming, as companies in EVERY industry sector insist we do so, or they find someone that will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This reminds me of a few months ago when JCB announced pay cut of 10% IIRC to all staff in order to share the pain and preserve jobs. A couple of months later redundancies announced but I assume those still there are still on 90% pay. A cut is easier to accept if it applies to everyone so the employer avoids employee unrest initially. I expect to see KPMG announce redundancies in a few months anyway, but those remaining will still be on a 4 day week.

Having used the services of such companies, I have always been astounded by the level of fees of these people, particularly junior staff, and it was always unsustainable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with cutting civil servants is that they would just have to be paid benefits instead. If you want to make a difference they have to be employed in a productive activity, and there's not much of that around at the moment.

But they would be costing much less on benefits than on their big salaries plus various expenses plus pensions etc.

Also they wouldn't be getting in the ay of people doing real work.

Not saying that it would be good to get rid of all civil servants but the dead wood and non job types definately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But they would be costing much less on benefits than on their big salaries plus various expenses plus pensions etc.

Also they wouldn't be getting in the ay of people doing real work.

Not saying that it would be good to get rid of all civil servants but the dead wood and non job types definately.

Spot on. HR, legal, accountants and the like. Just get int eh way of anyone actually trying to add value to an organisation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 284 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.