An Italian manufacturing company has provoked widespread condemnation after distributing a highly controversial questionnaire to its staff, asking them to identify colleagues who should be made redundant. The move has been sharply criticised by trade unions, who have likened the tactic to a real-life version of the dystopian Netflix survival drama, Squid Game.
Questionnaire Sparks Immediate Outrage
The form was circulated by management at Bluergo, an electrical components maker based in the Veneto region, shortly before the Christmas period. It posed a direct and unsettling question to employees: 'which of your colleagues would you send home?'. This request triggered immediate outrage among the workforce and prompted fierce backlash from union representatives.
Criteria for Selection Deemed Unacceptable
According to reports from local media, staff were instructed to select colleagues based on a range of personal and professional criteria. These included identifying who was the youngest employee, who worked on a part-time basis, who had no family dependents to support, or simply who they felt 'didn't cut the mustard' in their role. Perhaps most controversially, workers were required to provide the full name and surname of those they believed should lose their jobs.
This demand led many employees to outright refuse to complete the form, with numerous protests being lodged against the company's management. The requirement to name individuals explicitly amplified the psychological pressure on staff, transforming an already difficult economic period into a deeply personal and divisive workplace conflict.
Management's Defence Fails to Quell Anger
In response to the furore, Bluergo's management later insisted that the questionnaire was not intended to single out specific individuals for dismissal. Instead, they characterised it as a 'listening tool' designed to gauge overall staff morale during a time of acknowledged market crisis and economic difficulty.
Company bosses asserted that the survey's ultimate aim was to prevent layoffs, not to encourage them. However, this justification did little to calm the anger and distress it had sparked among the workforce, who viewed it as a transparent attempt to shift the responsibility for painful redundancy decisions onto employees themselves.
Trade Unions Deliver Blistering Condemnation
The metal workers' union, FIOM-CGIL, through its Treviso branch, issued a scorching statement condemning the company's actions. The union accused Bluergo of turning an already 'dramatic' situation into a 'cruel game' that deliberately pitted colleagues against one another, thereby eroding workplace solidarity.
In their statement, the union declared the form an 'attack on workers' dignity' and an utterly unacceptable practice. 'It's unacceptable; in a context of true responsibility, corporate decisions of this kind must be governed seriously and with the involvement of those who represent the workers,' the union stated, emphasising the need for proper collective bargaining rather than ad-hoc opinion gathering.
A Call for Unity Over Division
Manuel Moretto, General Secretary of the FIOM's Treviso branch, was unequivocal in his criticism. 'What we are witnessing is not only a lack of respect for workers, but an attempt to disintegrate the social fabric of a company,' he said. 'In a time of difficulty, unity should be the answer, not division. These methods don't even represent democratic consultation. We will not allow workers to be forced to play this humiliating game.'
The incident highlights intense debates over ethical management practices during economic downturns, questioning where the responsibility for difficult staffing decisions should truly lie. The union has vowed to continue its opposition, framing the episode as a fundamental breach of workplace dignity and collective bargaining principles.
