Equal opportunity and diversity management meet downsizing. A case study in the UK airline industry
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/01425450610633055 |
| Published date | 01 January 2006 |
| Date | 01 January 2006 |
| Pages | 46-61 |
| Author | Asma Bajawa,Jean Woodall |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
Equal opportunity and diversity
management meet downsizing
A case study in the UK airline industry
Asma Bajawa
“GlobalAir”, and
Jean Woodall
Business School, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to report on case study research of employment downsizing
and the implications for equal opportunity and diversity management conducted in the UK airline
industry during 2002/2003.
Design/methodology/approach – Review of literature on downsizing and equal opportunity and
diversity management followed by identification of a number of research questions which are
answered with reference to secondary analysis of labour market data and interviews with key
informants from senior management and line management.
Findings – A planned approach to downsizing had been adopted that was strongly influenced by the
human resources function in terms of equal opportunity and diversity management. An adverse
impact on different employee groups had been avoided in order to sustain the diversity of the
workforce.
Research limitations/implications – The research focuses on the management of downsizing and
equal opportunity and diversity management. It addresses the perceptions of managers involved in
developing and implementing policy, but does not examine the perceptions of other employees.
Practical implications – There are some reflections on ways in which equal opportunity and
diversity management policy might adapt to organisational change and downsizing.
Originality/value – This paper brings together two scholarly debates on downsizing and equal
opportunity and diversity management, and provides case study evidence of how an equal
opportunity and diversity management agenda is implemented during organisational restructuring
and downsizing.
Keywords Downsizing,Equal opportunities, Airlines, UnitedKingdom
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The global economic downturn, increased competition, and the increased risk of
terrorism have put the survival of many airline carriers into question. Thus, it is not
surprising that some have developed strategies to downsize and restructure their
businesses. Downsizing has become a popular choice and apparently easy method for
many organisations to cope with unfavourable business conditions. However, policy
options may be constrained by other human resource considerations such as
maintaining levels of workforce trust, commitment, retention of talent, succession
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm
The authors are grateful to Dr Mark Saunders and to Dr Liz Docherty of Oxford Brookes
Business School, for comments on an earlier draft.
ER
28,1
46
Received 1 November 2004
Revised 27 April 2005
Accepted 10 May 2005
Employee Relations
Vol. 28 No. 1, 2006
pp. 46-61
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/01425450610633055
planning, career development, and developing a diverse workforce. Downsizing
initiatives stand in stark contradiction to many human resource management (HRM),
and particularly human resource development (HRD), interventions founded on the
principle of conserving and developing human and social capital. This paper explore s
what happens when equal opportunity (EO) and diversity management policy and
practice are confronted by the need of a major airline, GlobalAir (pseudonym), to
downsize during a two-year period between 2002 and 2003. It reports on the interface
between two corporate initiatives on EO and diversity on the one hand, and
downsizing on the other, and their implications for the workforce. The paper concludes
with some reflections on the need for robust monitoring of EO and diversity
management initiatives and the need to recognise that organisational change,
restructuring, and downsizing are increasingly common phenomena.
Theoretical framework
This research problem is informed a by a review of two sets of literature: that on
human resource downsizing, and that on EO and diversity management. It provides a
strong argument that both literatures tend to be relatively silent on their mutual
implications: the downsizing literature has some acknowledgement of EO implications,
while the EO and diversity management literature tends to ignore the issue of
workforce reductions.
Downsizing (or “rightsizing”, as it is referred to in some literature) has become a
frequent option for organisations to cope with unfavourable business conditions
(Zeffane and Mayo, 1994). Downsizing first appeared on a large scale in the 1980s, and
has been recurrent since then . The majority of organisatio ns contemplating
downsizing anticipate cost-savings by means of a reduction in fixed staff overheads,
and are attempting to reposition themselves as “lean and mean” in order to gain
competitive advantage in uncertain markets. In essence downsizing is the reduction of
an organisation’s staff through various methods such as outplacement, early
retirement, redundancy (severance), and suspending short-term contracts, but which is
done with the purpose of improving organisational performance (Kozlowski et al.,
1993).
While it has often been described as a reactive or tactical, and not a strategic
solution, there are indeed three broad strategies that firms tend to adopt when
downsizing (Cameron, 1994). The workforce reduction strategy is often the first choice
for organisations that want a “quick fix”, and this is usually implemented at all levels
of the organisation without consideration for the impact on key skill groups and
individuals. The work redesign strategy aims to reduce work instead of cutting the
number of employees, and focuses on the mid-term by phasing out functions,
hierarchical levels, departments or divisions, and redesigning tasks, combining units
and adopting a shorter working week. The systematic strategy is more long-term in
focus, aiming to ensure that a repetitive cycle of workforce reduction will not have to be
carried out in the future. A major concern is to simplify all organisational processes.
Yet while there is much agreement that downsizing is mainly driven by a desire for
cost reduction, these benefits are not always achieved (Burke and Nelson, 1997), and
the measures used to assess the effectiveness of downsizing initiatives do not
necessarily capture the impact on all stakeholders (Shaw and Barrett-Power , 1997).
Furthermore there is much evidence that downsizing raises serious human resource
EO and diversity
management
47
To continue reading
Request your trial