Guess I don't understand the way SVU thinks. They hire more part timers to keep the average hourly rate lower, just to lay them off to save money? And it costs $2000+ to hire just one person off the street. Where is the $ense in this?
ACME tried to get the unions to agree to buyouts. Not all the unions agreed to go along, so eliminating the part-timers was the path of least resistance in bringing labor costs more in line with the reduced business volume.
Hmmm...normally I would agree with the comments here but since these are part time folks, it coujld actually signal an increase in outlay. The work these folks did is not going away - so it will have to be covered by existing staff - either full time folks or other part timers (and this may lead to more overtime).
If they had closed a bunch of stores or made some reductions in force for salaried workers, then I woujld probably agree. A caveat here is that they may be able to avoid severance (depending on union rules and issues).