GarryP

In the US job losses are called "Pink Slips"

In the UK it's always been "P45"

So what is it called in Australia?

OzTennis

We just used to say you got the boot or got sacked or the boss said hooroo but other suggestions:

Coalition cuts?

Boss says you are a 'bludger' and you should 'rack off'?

You've taken too many 'sickies' 'sport'?

'Nick off' mate 'you've got tickets on yourself'?

'You are going to be on your Pat Malone' (alone)?

Other suggestions?

Amazulu

It's the Spanish archer - El Bow

GarryP

The reason I ask is because it came up in conversation, and I couldn't think what the stereotypical Australian would be for "getting your P45" - something everyone would understand, but was more 'poetic' than the prosaic redundancy slip.

Can't be the american 'pink slip' obviously, since the NSW-types use that for cars.

The best we could come up with was "getting the flick" - but that doesn't only refer to losing your job.

OzTennis

Yep, I understood why you were asking. It doesn't have a definitive answer countrywide like P45 and pink slip and might vary from state to state as well. Get the flick (flick pass/ar*e) yep.

spouse of scouse

Australian colloquialisms for I lost my job

Got the bullet
Got a DCM*

*DCM, Don't Come Monday

Gordon Barlow

Fifty years ago it was "got the sack" or "got the boot". When I first lived in England, I was amused by the euphemism " made redundant"; I'd never heard it before.

Dreamy

Being made redundant is different to being fired, here it's the same as being retrenched (although in my experience, some employers use 'retrenched' to mean 'we don't want you anymore, we'll just wait a couple of weeks and then get someone else in to do the same job with a different job title and slightly different job spec')

Gordon Barlow

Yes I know what "redundant" means literally; but it seemed to me at the time - and since - that it was used in just about every circumstance of being fired. After all, if a company is "retrenching" it actually does fire some of its workers, right?

Dreamy

Well, no.

It's a legal term, exactly as it is here. You can fire someone (subject to a company's termination policies/legal guidelines) and replace them the next day.

If you make someone redundant or retrench them, then it's because the position is no longer there. Voluntary redundancy is subject to different rules, usually to reduce workforce numbers altogether rather than in a specific role.

People made redundant/retrenched are entitled to a minimum payout based on length of service. Someone who is fired is only entitled to any wages/holiday pay/etc due to them.

GarryP

Thing is, it's generally easier to make someone 'redundant' than it is to fire them - in view of the current laws, etc. in the civilised world.

Therefore what generally happens, if they don't have some nice excuse to get rid of someone, is that they are 'made redundant', a little shuffling of the deckchairs is arranged, and if they still need the same manpower, a lower ranked hob is created within the structure. People kept on might get a nice new title, the reorg hides traceability, and the person 'let go' at least gets a bit of cash.

Cheaper, easier, quicker - with the added advantage of reorg boots.

Where it's easy to fire someone (such as in the US) they get told to not come in Monday.

Beoz

There's also the general hassle of firing someone because they are just shit.

Don't start me on the costs of that.

Australian workers have it so good.

spouse of scouse

I like that Oz has decent legislation in place to protect workers. But it can go too far.

I have many examples, but the 'best' one was when I was the director of a local government division. One of the managers reporting to me had decided that all he had to do to earn his $120,000+ per annum salary was to order his staff to do all his work, blame them if something went wrong, turn up when he felt like it (which wasn't that often), and generally play the big suit in charge.

His arrogance was astounding - for example, the officer in charge of the local police station arrived on time at his office for a meeting - Mr Manager sat with his feet on his desk reading a newspaper, while the police officer waited outside his glass walled office fuming!

In order to follow the organization's staff discipline procedure, I had to meet with this twonk 4 times over the same number of weeks, with the HR manager. I had to interview every one of his staff members, every government and business partner of his branch. I had to spell out to said twonk exactly why his behavior was unacceptable (because you can't expect the poor petal to know that being a lazy, arrogant shit isn't the right thing to do). I had to make sure that there were no personal circumstances that were affecting his behavior. I had to ask him if there was anything he needed from me or the organization, in order to assist him to change his behavior. I had to let him know that he could bring a support person in with him to every interview. blah blah blah

When I finally got to the end of the process and sacked him, he took the organization to the Industrial Relations tribunal. I duly appeared there, along with the HR guy, and he was asking for 6 months pay as compensation for being sacked.

The IR commissioner told us privately that the bloke didn't have a leg to stand on, but we had to work out an offer for him as 'it's worth it to give him something to make the whole thing go away'. We didn't want to give him anything, but after I rang the CEO we offered him a week's pay. He took it, but by the way he slunk off I think his perception of himself as a hugely important 'player' had diminished somewhat.

Last I heard, he was working in a homeless shelter for older men. Poor buggers, as if they don't have enough to put up with!

Beoz

I was referring to the private service ........ and then there's the public service and unions .... my word.

spouse of scouse

I was referring to the public service........
tomayto, tomato