In a strategic shift, Asda has announced further job reductions, just days after making 500 staff redundant without prior consultation.
The latest round of job cuts is anticipated to affect IT personnel involved in the grocery retailer’s ongoing transformation project known as ‘Project Future.’ This initiative focuses on detaching Asda’s IT infrastructure from its former parent company, Walmart. While the exact number of affected head office staff remains undisclosed, Asda has categorised it as ‘meaningful.’
The decision comes shortly after Asda mandated that over 5,000 of its head office employees return to the office for a minimum of three days per week. This move aligns with a broader strategy to counteract declining sales. However, significant concerns have been raised by worker unions regarding the lack of adherence to the government-mandated 45-day consultation period required for mass redundancies exceeding 100 positions. Notably, there are allegations of redundancies including pregnant staff members on maternity leave.
Representatives from the GMB union have expressed their dismay, highlighting potential circumventions of legal processes that ensure fair treatment during mass layoffs. They have emphasised the necessity of ensuring equality for all employees, including women, individuals with disabilities, and those with caring responsibilities.
Contrarily, Asda’s chairman, Lord Rose, defended the company’s approach, claiming no employment laws had been violated. He argued that bypassing the lengthy consultation period was a ‘humane’ way of conducting layoffs, as it reduced uncertainty for employees and offered them enhanced compensation packages compared to what would have been available through standard consultations. He stated, ‘We said to them, Right, we are going to offer you a package that is greater than what you would have got through consultation. People understand that and they respect that. It’s a painful process but it has been done in a humane way.’
The unfolding situation at Asda highlights the tension between corporate restructuring efforts and employee welfare. As the company navigates this challenging period, the repercussions for its workforce remain a critical area of concern.
