2.

Employee Turnover

Table X. Assessment of Employee Turnover with regards to the pandemic policies.

GROUP 1 GROUP 2 OVERALL
EMPLOYEE TURN OVER
WM VI WM VI WM VI
1. Did you ever had the need to change
the employees' schedules since the pandemic
began? (Kinailangan mo ba na baguhin ang
mga iskedyul ng mga empleyado nang 3.72 A 3.68 A 3.70 A
magsimula ang pandemya?)

2. Did you lay off some of your

employees because your income is low?
(Nagbawas ka ba ng mga empleyado dahil
3.16 N 3.18 N 3.17 N
maliit na ang iyong kita?)

3. Was the effect of laying off

employees caused a significant impact in your
business? (Naging malaki ba ang epekto ng
3.48 A 3.32 N 3.40 A
pagbabawas mo ng inyong mga tauhan?)

4. Did your business survive after you

fired your employees and took on more
responsibility? (Nakaraos ba ang iyong
negosyo pagkatapos mong magbawas ng mga
3.57 A 3.41 A 3.49 A
empleyado at kumuha ng higit pang mga
responsibilidad?)

5. Do you think the main reason on the 3.81 A 3.77 A 3.79 A

decreasing number of your employees is due
to the pandemic protocols the government
imposed? (Sa tingin mo ba na ang pinaka
rason ng pagbabawas ng inyong tauhan ay
dahil sa mga patakaran na ipinatupad ng
pamahalaan?)
 Composite Weighted Mean 3.55 3.47 A 3.51 A

As presented in the Table X, the assessment of the first batch of respondents (Group 1)
as to employee turnover has resulted to a composite weighted mean of 3.55. Employee
Schedule was affected and the employers had the need to change it rated as agree with a
weighted mean of 3.72. The employers also had to lay off some of the employees because the
revenue was low rated as neutral with a weighted mean of 3.16. The effect of laying off
employees caused a significant impact in the business rated as agree with a weighted mean of
3.48. The businesses survived after laying off some of the employees and taking more
responsibilities from the ones that was laid off rated as agree with a weighted mean of 3.57.
And the employers believed that the main reason why they had to lay off some of their
employees was because of the pandemic protocols the government imposed rated as agree
with a weighted mean of 3.81.

Also, the assessment of the second batch of respondents (Group 2) as to employee

turnover has resulted to a composite weighted mean of 3.47. Employee Schedule was affected
and the employers had the need to change it rated as agree with a weighted mean of 3.68. The
employers also had to lay off some of the employees because the revenue was low rated as
neutral with a weighted mean of 3.18. The effect of laying off employees caused a significant
impact in the business rated as neutral with a weighted mean of 3.32. The businesses survived
after laying off some of the employees and taking more responsibilities from the ones that was
laid off rated as agree with a weighted mean of 3.41. And the employers believed that the main
reason why they had to lay off some of their employees was because of the pandemic protocols
the government imposed rated as agree with a weighted mean of 3.77.

In addition to that, the overall assessment as to employee turnover has resulted to a

composite weighted mean of 3.51. Employee Schedule was affected and the employers had the
need to change it rated as agree with a weighted mean of 3.70. The employers also had to lay
off some of the employees because the revenue was low rated as neutral with a weighted
mean of 3.17. The effect of laying off employees caused a significant impact in the business
rated as neutral with a weighted mean of 3.40. The businesses survived after laying off some of
the employees and taking more responsibilities from the ones that was laid off rated as agree
with a weighted mean of 3.49. And the employers believed that the main reason why they had
to lay off some of their employees was because of the pandemic protocols the government
imposed rated as agree with a weighted mean of 3.79.

Overall, employers had to either lay off some of the employees or change their schedule
to still accommodate all of the employees because since the pandemic, their revenue have
been unstable. The employers believe that such practices caused a significant impact in the
business. Despite all of these, the employers also believe that the business has survived by
being flexible and adaptive to the changes in the society. And the employers think that the
pandemic protocols the government has implemented are the ones mainly responsible for the
downsizing in the business.

In general, as stated by David (2020), Cook and Barrett (2020), many businesses were
having a hard time trying to adjust to the policies relating to the pandemic. That the businesses
may also suffer as a result to laying off some of their employees, and might even cause the
business to totally shutdown. Alvez, Cheng, Luo, Hao (2020), Shafi, Lui, Ren (2020), Hao (2020)
also found out that small businesses are the most vulnerable to the crisis. On the other hand,
Gong (2020), Umar and Rizvi (2021) suggested that businesses should look out for operational
changes and make contingency plans to keep the business running and ensure their
performance and profitability despite the major changes in the market.
 CHAPTER 4

Sub-problem No. 3: Based on the findings, what intervention measures may be

proposed?

The researchers formulated the following activities which provides different

programs to help in addressing the problem of the respondents’ employee turnover. The

programs include steps done by the management to ensure that employees will remain

despite the hardships of the employer due to the pandemic protocols. Also, the

programs reassure workers that the employer is taking care of them and let them know

that the despite the business’ struggles, the employees will not be laid off or downsized.

Such programs are relevant because it answers the problem many face because of the

implemented policies.

Intervention Measures

Area of
Intervention Objective Person Responsible Time Frame
Concern

To establish a
Business systematic and Government
Revenue Adaptability proactive business & XXX
Plan plan wherein all Employers
aspects of business
Employee
Turnover and its related
concerns are
addressed and
resolved to multi-tiered
intervention from the
Store
government and the
Availabilit
employers. This shall
y
help the employers
with regards to the
problems arisen in
times of hardships,
Business such as a pandemic.
Closure
 CHAPTER 5
Summary, Conclusion, and Recommendations

Summary

The relevant findings the researchers have gathered are the following:

The result of the survey, as assessed by the respondent employers, was rated as

Agree with an overall weighted mean of 3.89. Similarly, two of the variables were rated

as Agree, and one as Strongly Agree as follows. Revenue was rated Agree with a

composite weighted mean of 3.94; Employee Turnover was rated Agree with a

composite weighted mean of 3.51; and Store Availability was rated Strongly Agree with

a composite weighted mean of 4.22.

The significant variance with regards to the assessment of the respondents has

resulted to a Z-Value of -0.137, which is less than the critical value of 1.671 at 0.05 level

of significance. Therefore, it can be inferred that the null hypothesis is to be accepted.

The proposed intervention to produce a business adaptability plan addresses the

problems businesses face during the unfortunate period of pandemic and the areas of
concern as to revenue, employee turnover, store availability, and business closure to

have a solid, proactive, well-thought plan for small businesses as to how they can

manage should something like is to happen again the next time.