Union Response to the RCMP “Transformation”

As a trade union, we have reached a point where we feel the need to express our position on the planned change – namely, the transfer of IKEA for Business employees and Home Consultants under the management of the Contact Centre.

We have been addressing this change from the very beginning, as employees affected by it reached out to us in our role as trade union representatives.

We understand that this change is complex and likely important from a business perspective. However, that does not entitle the employer to treat employees unethically.
This transformation has been discussed in the affected departments for the past two years, and in some countries, it has already been implemented. For instance, we have information from Germany and Poland, where employees now work under different conditions – such as 60% remote work and 40% onsite, or 3 days of home office and 2 days in the workplace.

We therefore find it incomprehensible that employees are only receiving fragmented, inaccurate, confusing, and at times even false or last-minute information. (This transformation is to take effect on September 1st, and some employees are learning key details only three weeks beforehand.)

This change significantly affects the working lives and conditions of those involved. Yet they are being treated with utter disregard (e.g., comments like: "As of September, you're no longer my problem, and I won't deal with it further"), which is completely unprofessional in a company like IKEA that prides itself on its values.
Every employee accepts a position with at least some expectations of what lies ahead. Currently, IKEA for Business employees and Home Consultants feel like a burden caught in the middle of chaos, with no clear idea of what awaits them, even at the last moment.

For example, Home Consultants were initially told by their managers during store briefings that they would receive no compensation for lost weekend shifts, as their new working hours would be evenly distributed Monday through Friday – despite their employment contracts stating otherwise.
Given IKEA's current wage levels, this change will have a noticeable impact on personal and family budgets. They were told they could "flex" within the store – for example, by taking weekend shifts in the kitchens or elsewhere.
Not only is this outside their agreed job description, but the union was later informed that this "flexibility" would not be possible after all. This was later changed yet again, and we were told that weekend shifts would be possible, but only within the RCMP. However, there is still no clarity on how this new system will be reflected in their employment contracts.

It must also be acknowledged that, in addition to losing weekend premiums, employees who will no longer work in stores with a canteen will partially lose access to subsidized meals.
Yes, they will receive a meal allowance of CZK 107 – even though the tax-advantaged rate for 2025 is CZK 123.90 – but this amount is not sufficient to provide full compensation in today's economy.

Salary remains another unclear area. We have learned that the positions of B2B Generalist and Interior Designer are classified one pay grade lower than IKEA Business Specialist or Home Furnishing Consultant.
Although employees will retain their current salaries, the potential for future wage growth is uncertain. IKEA claims not to use pay grades, only salary ranges – but these ranges are not communicated to employees.

Another major issue is remote work.
Originally, employees were told they would need to be present at the store or the RCMP once a week and could otherwise work from home. This, too, turned out to be false – we were later informed that only two days of home office per week would be permitted, with mandatory in-person attendance for the remaining days.

We are also disappointed by IKEA's unwillingness to assist employees who lack suitable home-working conditions – for example, through a gift card to purchase a desk, chair, etc.
Yes, employees will receive a home office allowance of CZK 9 per hour (about CZK 1,440 per month for full-time workers). This is above the legal minimum of CZK 4.80, which we appreciate. However, any amount above that is taxed as regular income.
This allowance is meant to cover electricity, water, heating, equipment wear, and internet – not to purchase work equipment.

It is unfortunate that IKEA – a furniture retailer whose motto is "To create a better everyday life for the many" – is unwilling to accommodate employees with limited resources.

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of this change is the pressure placed on employees by management.
Constant questions like "Have you signed yet? We're just waiting for you, everyone else already has" (which is often untrue) create an atmosphere of pressure and fear.
According to IKEA, this is allegedly not an organisational change but a "transformation." If that were truly the case, why are employees being asked to sign contract amendments?
One of the alternatives presented to employees was to find a different position within the store – but this is neither an acceptable approach to "transformation" nor an employee obligation.

In our view, this approach is intended to avoid the employer's obligation to pay severance. If an employee refuses the change, they should be offered a position consistent with their current contract, or they should be given notice due to redundancy – with severance pay according to the Labour Code (§52(c) and §67 of Act No. 262/2006 Coll.):

• 1 month's salary if the employee has worked for less than 1 year

• 2 months' salary if more than 1 year

• 3 months' salary if more than 2 years

Ironically, when employees first asked directly, "What kind of change is this?" the answer was:
"This is an organisational change where the organisational unit for B2B and HFC employees will change from the store or PAOP to RCMP."
Later, even this was rebranded as a "transformation," and we were told that it does not constitute a fundamental change.

Given that employees are being transferred to a different organisational unit, will use new software, follow different workflows, undergo training for a new way of working, and work partially remotely, we believe this clearly constitutes a significant change in working conditions.

IKEA itself confirmed this when it terminated one employee who rejected the change via mutual agreement – with severance paid out as a "special bonus."

We understand that this is a complex process with difficult decisions. However, we urge that the change also be viewed from the employees' perspective – and that decisions be clearly defined first, and then communicated in a timely and understandable way, not at the last minute.
All of us undergo training in "change management," intended to help employees accept change – but even then, time is needed for proper adaptation.

To conclude, we must sadly state that this "transformation" is yet more evidence that Ingvar Kamprad is no longer among us – and with him, the spirit, values, and atmosphere that once defined IKEA are slowly disappearing.