4 ms·

I only skimmed, but it indicated that 34% of a pool of ("primarily") 47 workers would be replaced. So ... 16 employees. I suppose that's interesting, but it's

• halflings 10y ago
  That's not what the article is saying. It says 34 employees (not 34%) primarily from a pool of 47 workers on 5-year contracts will be "made redundant". (the rest may not have their contracts renewed) That's more than 30% of the 131 employees. The article also cites other companies doing the same thing, even if no staff cuts are involved for now.
  • cwbrandsma 10y ago
    This is reporter math we are talking about here. Expect the numbers to be surrounded by good prose, but accuracy to be dubious.
  • charlieflowers 10y ago
    You are correct -- I misread it.
• dclowd9901 10y ago
  It sounds like they're replacing the adjusters, which I thought was a pretty unstructured aspect of insurance claim management. _That_ was the big story to me. Seems we're all closer to becoming redundant than we thought.