>Still scratching my head about firing just over two employees per branch closed.
The fact is most of these closures will be running on less than 2.5 Whole Time Equivalent staff already.
Picking a random closure - Barclays Alston (chosen as they provide volumes in their closure reports, RBS aren't as granular)
https://www.home.barclays/content/dam/barclayspublic/docs/Citizenship/Reports-Publications/branch-closures/Job-12166%20-%20Barclays%20Branch%20Closure%20Booklets%20-%20Release%2013%20-%20Alston%20-%20Final%20v0.2%2002122015.pdf
closed 2015 - ahead of closure, weekly counter transactions: just 115.
That's fewer than 25 a day or 3 an hour. There's no way there was any more than 2 staff on site to service those volumes.
So actually the redundancy numbers probably do work. Sad but true and a fact of modern llife.
Incidentally if you doubt my "random closure" assertion you can test this yourself as these closure reports are public domain for all Banks and are on their corporate websites.
Google, as ever, is your friend...
Biting the hand that feeds IT
