What do the words in scope mean

[spanieleyes22]

So in my workplace we were told back in May that there is a big restructure happening and everyone's job will be at risk from redundancy. Last Friday an email was sent out and I was so happy as I read it that there would be no redundancies now as enough people had taken voluntary or resigned. But today our managers said no, jobs are still at risk due to this sentence. I don't understand what in scope means

It says "therefore from this point onward in scope colleagues remaining within the organisation are no longer at risk of compulsory redundancies "

I read that we are safe but apparently not. Anyone help?

you know who'd be best placed to tell you exactly what this means?

Your manager.

Yeh I have 2 managers but neither understand this. This has come from boss boss person very high up who I couldn't contact

Cant help, I’d read it the same as you. That in scope employees are those in danger of redundancy, but now in scope employees are no longer at risk.

It means fuck all in this sentence. If you remove it, it clearly says that everyone who still remains in the organisation are safe from redundancies. I am pretty sure someone made a typo or it got autocorrected. Or just poorly worded as someone was trying to sound too clever. Either way, it appears you are safe.

Hmm… the way I read it is they’ve got a list of roles that aren’t in consideration for elimination… that’s the ‘in scope’ bit. But those not in those roles are still at risk.

But that being said it’s hard to say without the full context of the letter. Ask your manager to get clarification.

It’s basically meaningless and either is intentionally confusing or a miscommunication. What did the rest of the email say? eg if it said something like employees in core business areas will be retained, these people would be “in scope” but people in other areas would be “out of scope” and still at risk of redundancy.

The managers seem to think that anyone who is not "in scope" is still at risk from redundancy. But confusion as to what that actually means .

It's meaningless as a part sentence. What does the rest of the sentence / paragraph say?

Yeh it said that "we have carefully considered voluntary redundancy applications and evaluated vacancies in relevant budget areas to mitigate compulsory resundancies. I am pleased to inform you that we have achieved the planned efficiencies"

And then the in scope sentence

I'd drop an email to HR asking them for clarification on what 'in scope' means.

It only makes sense if the person who wrote it thought that only some people were at risk of redundancy ("in scope" to distinguish them from the people not at risk) rather than everyone.

Or were referring to the people accepted for VR as being in scope and not at risk of CR, implying that everyone else is still at risk. But that doesn't make sense with them saying the efficiencies had been achieved.

Would read it exactly the same as you have. If they are still planning on compulsory redundancies, I think they've made an error in their communications.

Thanks we are all confused. I've asked the question but not very confident of a response.

That’s even more confusing! If “in scope” was intended to mean “employed in the areas targeted for redundancies” then it could mean what you originally thought - but I never trust this sort of communication anyway as I’ve been told once too often “there are no more planned redundancies” shortly before losing half my team …

I means that whatever pool of employees they were going to hit with redundancies are no longer at risk

they have put employees into pools probably based on their job title.

then they have decided what pool could be downsized & the work load spread thinner

now after voluntary redundancies they no longer have to go through the grading process eg: performance, absence… and grade individuals for who stays & who goes

if feel lucky that folk have put themselves forward. But maybe that’s what the company wanted? To try get rid of the longer people in service

you will never know their true reason

In scope means 'included in'.

I would read your paragraph without the 'in scope' part...

therefore from this point onward in scope colleagues remaining within the organisation are no longer at risk of compulsory redundancies "

Does it mean 'out of scope' employees are still at risk of compulsory redundancies.

Whatever 'scope' means in this context.

Is it a typo??

Unless they have switched their 'scope' to another separate group of individuals that were previously not at risk, then I'd take it to mean everyone is safe. They wouldn't be using language like 'pleased' if they were still going to be booting people out? It's badly worded but probably from a generic HR template. It should not have said that at all if it was always everyone who was 'in scope'. I guess maybe the C suite never were, hence the differentiation?

When my place did it, some departments were out of scope, so safe, those in scope had to reduce staffing levels.

That's what I'm afraid of. And I don't know if I'm in scope or out of scope!

Ok based in the paragraph that you added. It means that employees who were in the pool for redundancy no longer are because the voluntary ones were the right mix of roles and cost.

I think you are good for this round. I generally wait for a round 2 before feeling secure though (as secure as you can ever be)

For example…

Bob, Mary, and Greg were in scope or in the pool to be evaluated for redundancy… Greg volunteered so Bob and Mary are the in scope pool that are now ok.

That's how I read it and why I celebrated at the weekend after all these weeks of stress! But then today the managers are saying no we are all still at risk

If the managers are simply interpreting 'in scope' on their own, without inside knowledge (and can't explain why it actually means the opposite of what it sounds like), I'd suspect their reading comprehension may simply be worse than yours. On the other hand, if they're getting word through the grapevine that involuntary redundancies are still possible, I wouldn't breathe a sigh of relief just yet.

You can't just remove a word from a sentence and expect it to keep it's meaning! If you replaced In-Scope with 'Blonde' would you continue to expect non-blondes to be happy now? It clearly means that in-scope people are safe (whoever they are) but out-of-scope people may not be. It's a shitty sentence but it means something to whoever wrote it.