• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free Notes, Lectures, Tests and Forums for ACCA and CIMA exams

  • ACCA
  • CIMA
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Books
  • Forums
  • Ask AI
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
  • ACCA Forums
  • Ask ACCA Tutor
  • CIMA Forums
  • Ask CIMA Tutor
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Buy/Sell Books
  • All Forums
  • Latest Topics

20% off ACCA & CIMA Books

OpenTuition recommends the new interactive BPP books for March and June 2025 exams.
Get your discount code >>

Ratio Labour Turnover

Forums › ACCA Forums › ACCA MA Management Accounting Forums › Ratio Labour Turnover

  • This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 10 years ago by John Moffat.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • October 7, 2014 at 2:59 pm #203741
    gabbi08
    Member
    • Topics: 135
    • Replies: 181
    • ☆☆☆

    Hello

    Could you please check if I have answered the question correctly? When calculation the ratio labour turnover I am not sure if I have to use the number of the employee who left the company and need to be replaced (624) or the one that should be replaced (530)

    At 1 January a company employed 3641 employees and at 31 December employee numbers were 3735. During the year 624 employees chose to leave the company. What was the labour turnover rate for the year?

    Working:

    530/3688*100 = 14.37%
    3735-3641-634= 530 (employees need to be replaced)
    3641+3735/2 = 3688 (average per year)

    Thanks
    Gabbi

    October 7, 2014 at 3:37 pm #203747
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54665
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    You should have used 624 replaced (everything else is OK).

    It is not how many needs to be replace or should be replace – it is how many actually were replaced.

    So…..since the total number of employees increased over the year, it means that all 624 who left were replaced (and more extra were employed as well).

    If, however, the number of employees had fallen over the year, then it would mean that not all 624 were replaced. (Just suppose that at the end of the year there were 3,500 employees. In that case 624 left and 483 were employed (3500 – (3641 – 624)).
    So then the number replaced would simply be 482)

    October 7, 2014 at 3:44 pm #203749
    gabbi08
    Member
    • Topics: 135
    • Replies: 181
    • ☆☆☆

    Dear Mr Moffat

    Thank you very much for the explanation. This make everything more clear.
    I really appreciate your help.

    Many thanks

    Gabbi

    October 7, 2014 at 7:31 pm #203767
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54665
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    You are welcome, Gabbi 🙂

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Log In

Primary Sidebar

Donate
If you have benefited from our materials, please donate

ACCA News:

ACCA My Exam Performance for non-variant

Applied Skills exams is available NOW

ACCA Options:  “Read the Mind of the Marker” articles

Subscribe to ACCA’s Student Accountant Direct

ACCA CBE 2025 Exams

How was your exam, and what was the exam result?

BT CBE exam was.. | MA CBE exam was..
FA CBE exam was.. | LW CBE exam was..

Donate

If you have benefited from OpenTuition please donate.

PQ Magazine

Latest Comments

  • Ken Garrett on The nature and structure of organisations – ACCA Paper BT
  • Ark1 on The nature and structure of organisations – ACCA Paper BT
  • zsotuminu on The weighted average cost of capital (WACC) – ACCA Financial Management (FM)
  • Kim Smith on What is Assurance? – ACCA Audit and Assurance (AA)
  • Kim Smith on AA Chapter 17 Questions

Copyright © 2025 · Support · Contact · Advertising · OpenLicense · About · Sitemap · Comments · Log in