Among the companies’ employees, the most likely people to be laid off are Lisa Parks and Charles Thomas. Their active participation in the future seems dubious since both of them are not going to be devoted to the company due to the former’s upcoming insurance payments and the latter’s rumored desire to leave. Meanwhile, when choosing between them, Charles would be a more likely option since he has no health issues.
However, this measure could be avoided by relying on other indirect methods to meet the needs of the business. Thus, it is possible to freeze the increase in benefits for a half a year so that the workers who are not motivated to bring profits would leave. In addition, the company’s managers could introduce temporary unpaid leaves for employees while taking turns in order to see who is not going to contribute in the future.
Nevertheless, regardless of the selected course of actions, the affected individuals will require assistance. It can be presented in a form of limited payments for a certain period of time for the people who have been let go. Even though it is clear that the company’s situation is not favorable for resorting to this solution, it is more cost-efficient than keeping all the employees regardless of their actual performance. Moreover, the remaining three employees’ needs should also be addressed, and this task will combine the efforts on adequate distribution of all duties among them and encouraging them with an increase in benefits.