Humberts has confirmed that it has made redundancies – and been unable to pay those employees for their last month.
The actual number of redundancies has not been revealed but sources say about 50 people have been affected.
It is also understood that those affected were told of their redundancies in a conference call.
Ian Westerling, managing director of Humberts, told EYE yesterday: “Our cost saving measures resulted in redundancies on Friday and regrettably we were unable to pay those employees for April.
“We are working hard to secure a future for the profitable parts of the business by seeking a suitable purchaser.”
According to Companies House, Humberts’ accounts are overdue.
It says that Humberts’ last accounts were made up to December 31, 2015, and that its accounts for the year ending December 31, 2016, were due by last September 30.
Comments (12)
So if they can’t afford to pay the 50 or so staff that they have just made redundant, how are they going to pay the staff that remain? Bet the directors are all sat there getting paid in full every month without fail, and probably paying themselves big bonuses as well.
Pretty sh*t state of affairs if you ask me.
big_k_mac38
50 staff @ say £2000 average (conservative estimate)… ErNIC on that…
They’ll have kept £120k – or a healthy chunk more – in their kitty to squander elsewhere.
Oh dear, this is a sad day. I had always respected that company.
As it happens I am looking to recruit a new staff member, I had better work out what we need and write an ad soon !
What an appalling way for individuals to be treated….the emotional and financial damage of being made redundant is bad enough but to not be given the courtesy and humanity of a face to face explanation shows a complete lack of respect and care.
I wish all of those affected the very best of fortune.
Absolute disgrace – The directors who did this to their staff (and I use a small ‘d’ in directors pointedly) are not immune from their actions just because there is a limited company in the way. Company Law makes individual directors personally accountable and I would suing each and everyone of them personally for my lost salary plus damages. And I would be seeking for them to be banned from holding the office of director going forward. The affected staff have the ability to ensure there are consequences to the actions of their senior colleagues – get together and all chip in to fund a legal suit.
Just because a business has been going since 1842, doesn’t make it a good business, in fact if anything I think its probably filled with complaceny. Strikes me that there are too many dinosaurs in Humberts that have failed to adapt to change and rely arrogantly on the name above the door. What about those poor people who have invested tens of thousands in the franchise model who’ve been sold something that isn’t what they’ve been told it was and now leaves them vulnerable. There is dirt on the hands of every member of that board of directors including any other management or operational board that a business like that must have, who will have seen that the numbers don’t add up. Cost cutting should have happened long before now as to get to the end of the month and not even pay the staff is disgusting – perhaps Humberts might like to announce how many of their senior management team took a pay cut over the last 6 months to protect the business. I wonder just what value there is in the brand for any intelligent person to want to buy it or take it on. For those that are loyally remaining this month because they got paid last month, be careful as you will no doubt get to the end of this month and get zero.
Jonty73
Yours is very much a post of two halves.
I agree with the vast majority of what you have said in relation to the Management treatment of staff, however you cannot say that a business that has survived for almost 180 years is not a good business; nor that there has been a failure to ‘adapt to change’.
ANY business that has been running in our industry for more than 20 years has ‘adapted to change’ – several times as a bare minimum count of ‘key changes’ – and several thousand times if truth be told.
Of course, some people don’t always take to change well. But also some people/companies like to change for change’ sake – neither group will thrive in our industry and most will fail.
Whilst you may be right about the complacency aspect of some in the subject company (and a great many others to boot…), you have to also acknowledge that “the name above the door” IS the reason why a percentage of customers choose and use a particular brand. Getting a reputation is relatively easy – keeping it (or in some cases, losing it) is the hard part.
And what you have to pay a great deal of respect to, is the part that “dinosaurs”, as you put it, have played in the history of our planet.
This was my play on the subject of the genus Dinosauria here on EYE last February – which it appears needs another roll-out:
‘135 million years+/- on the planet before they were decimated to var-nigh extinction by a GEE – but their close relatives can still be found today.
Homosapiens, on the other hand – about 200,000 years to get where they are today.
‘Progress’ has resulted in this ‘new race’ of planetary caretakers being closer to wiping ourselves – and the planet itself – out than T-Rex and his cold-blooded buddies ever were.
Lesson to be learnt/learned (delete which you feel be grammatically correct – both work here ‘oop North) if you think you’re better/moreadvanced/whatever and the natural successor:
Don’t **** with the dinosaurs unless you have an asteroid!‘
I rest my case, m’Lud.
Very true!
I work for a company that has been around nearly as long as Humberts, and whilst I do feel that there is an element of ‘Dinosaur-ism’ in some areas, I also think that the company has adapted to various changes quite well. Doesn’t mean I don’t want to bang my head against the wall on a regular basis, but don’t count the old dogs out yet..
You make a fair point and perhaps my use of the word dinosaur should have been replaced with complacent old sods unwilling to adapt and change.
Ultimately, the name above the door might get the customers to walk through the door, but if its a complacent plum in their mouth agent who thinks that clients are just going to give their business due to the name, then perhaps there is a good reason why the business is facing the challenges it is.
Regardless, any of the long timers in Humberts and indeed the management board should look themselves in the mirror tonight and ask themselves how they would feel if they had been made redundant with no redundancy and no money in their bank account on the very day they got paid, especially as I dare say none of them offered to take a pay cut or defer their wages until things improved. Thats what we have to do in independent businesses if we want to keep trading when the cashflow gets tight.
Disgusting behaviour and I dare say a huge amount of damage done to “the name above the door” and a massive pile of work for whoever is brave enough to take it on.
Shocking treatment of staff – and points more than a finger at the management for future reliability.
Of course I’m sure that the remaining staff won’t be worried in the slightest today that what they did yesterday won’t receive remuneration for at the end of the month…
Sad Humberts very much like Savills very much the country house estate agent with a long history cut from the finest cloth. Difficult to imagine the partners from way back when not paying their staff !!
Made redundant and told you will not be getting your last months pay on a conference call.?!
Absolute lack of class. I would have taken everything that was not nailed down and fallen through the pipeline.