The bank's communications department wants to announce another round of layoffs. This would be uncontroversial except that they want to do it in advance. The draft press release says it plans to lay off a further 5 per cent of staff in Asia in the next three months.
My objections to this strategy have fallen on deaf ears. The point I have tried to make is that it's not particularly helpful to let staff know this is coming. It just gives people one more thing to worry about.
I'm pretty sure I'm right, but I am having a terrible time trying to convince anyone. And it's not because I don't have any good arguments. For example, during a recent discussion on the topic, I said: 'I don't think it does any good to have the whole firm worrying about whether they will lose their jobs.'
To which Christopher Simons, the head of communications, replied: 'But Alan, we believe that it is in the interests of our employees to give them fair advance warning. We have a commitment to open communication.'
'Sure,' I replied, 'that would make sense if you were warning the specific people who were going to lose their jobs. But you're not. You want to warn the entire firm, 95 per cent of whom are not going to lose their jobs. But thanks to your announcement, everyone will have cause for concern.'
'In the long run though, Alan, the staff will respect that we are open in our communications, and when the layoffs do take place, employees will be comforted to know that we honour our promises,' he said.