Embed Notice

@Lady_Penelope Toby Young reckons it’s bollocks:

Why do I say it’s fishy? Well, making half the 114 staff redundant because Stonewall is no longer going to receive ~£166,000 a year from USAID only makes sense if its 114 staff are being paid, on average, £2,912 a year each (57 x 2,912 = ~166,000). So, the nasty orange man’s spiteful cuts to Stonewall’s funding must be an excuse, not the real reason for the redundancies.

This is the take from an informed critic of the organisation in a WhatsApp group I’m in:

They’re assuming (probably rightly) that all their staff are innumerate and they are using this as an excuse to make redundancies easier to sell. Better than saying “We’re shit, we’ve destroyed our brand, we can’t get a decent CEO, we can’t keep board members, experts are genuinely surprised that we managed to get our accounts signed off last year with a operating deficit of nearly a million” – and this way they get rid of dead weight, restructure and go cap in hand to the Government.

If any Stonewall employees are made redundant by the organisation for this bullshit reason they may have a case in the Employment Tribunal.