Two complete speeches for a company town hall, both for difficult cases: poor figures and an open site decision. The companies and names are fictional, the mechanics are real. After each speech, you will see why it works. Structure, length and legal context are explained on town hall speech.
Example 1: The CEO after a hard quarter
Situation: Quarterly town hall in the production hall at Berkhoff Engineering, 280 employees, many standing. Orders have dropped sharply, and rumours about reduced hours have been circulating for two weeks.
Colleagues,
I will start with the number people have been talking about for two weeks. Our order intake in the second quarter was 19 percent below plan. That is the weakest figure since 2020. Today I will tell you what is behind it, what we are doing and what I do not yet know.
Where did the drop come from? Two of our three biggest customers have delayed projects. The packaging line for Denmark is on hold, and Herrmann & Sons have cut the framework contract from twelve systems to seven. Together, that leaves a gap of €4.2 million this year. Both customers pulled back because their own markets are shaky. It was not our work: the acceptance test in Randers in May passed without a single defect, for the first time in the company’s history.
What does that mean in practice? Three things. First, from September we will apply for reduced hours in assembly, probably 20 percent for four months. The works council has been involved since Monday; we will negotiate the details next week. After that, everyone affected will receive a personal calculation of what it means after tax. Second, there is a hiring freeze, with one exception: we will fill the two open maintenance roles because overtime there has been building since March. Third, we are moving the new paint line into next year.
What I cannot tell you today is that everything will be fine by autumn. I do not know that. What I do know: we have €11.8 million in liquidity, the service area is growing by eight percent, and in October Polar Fresh decides on two packaging lines for the new cold stores in Bremerhaven. That would be the largest single order in five years. In my planning, I am still assuming it does not come in.
On jobs: compulsory redundancies are not on the table this year. For next year, I will not promise anything I might have to withdraw in January. I will promise you a date: on 10 December, I will stand here again with the third-quarter figures and a statement on reduced hours in spring.
One more thing. Three times this week, I have heard that management is secretly preparing job cuts and that this town hall is the first step. That is not true. You do not have to take my word for it; you can check it. Everything I have said today, including the figures behind it, will be on the intranet tomorrow. And from next week, my calendar has an open hour every Thursday from 12 to 1, room 2.14, no appointment needed.
Now to your questions.
Why this speech works: The first sentence takes up the rumour directly: listeners get the worst number in the tenth second and can then listen instead of waiting for it. The speech cleanly separates three levels: what happened, what has been decided and what remains open. The repeated “I do not know” makes the hard commitments beside it more credible. Against the corridor rumours, she offers facts people can check: intranet figures and an open hour with a room number. The 10 December date replaces a promise she honestly cannot make.
Example 2: The works council chair before a site decision
Situation: Company town hall at Grewe & Landmann Logistics, Wunstorf site, 190 employees. Management is reviewing a possible merger with the Lehrte site. The decision is due in eight weeks.
Colleagues,
this meeting is fuller than any I have opened in nine years as works council chair. You know why. Management is reviewing whether Wunstorf and Lehrte should be merged into one site. I will tell you three things today: what we know, what the works council is doing and what you can do yourselves.
What we know. On 4 June, management informed us under section 111 of the Works Constitution Act about the planned operational change. Three options are being reviewed: everything to Lehrte, everything to Wunstorf, or both sites with a new split of responsibilities. The decision is due to be made by the advisory board on 28 August. Until then, nothing has been decided. We have that status in writing.
We demanded access to the site report and received it on 26 June. I will not dress up what it says: Lehrte has the newer halls and is closer to the motorway. But the report calculates relocation costs of €3.1 million and leaves out two points we have submitted in writing. Wunstorf has the rail connection that carried 28 percent of last year’s tonnage. And of our 41 drivers with hazardous-goods certification, 33 live closer to Wunstorf than to Lehrte. Moving the hall does not automatically move those people with it.
What the works council is doing. We have brought in our own economic adviser; the employer pays the cost, as the law provides. That report will be ready in mid-August, two weeks before the decision, and will go straight to the advisory board. We are not negotiating a social plan at this point. First, we are talking about keeping the site. If the decision goes against Wunstorf, negotiations on reconciliation of interests and a social plan start the next day. We have had a specialist employment lawyer on board since June for that.
What you can do. First: do not resign out of fear. Anyone who leaves voluntarily now gives up any claim under a possible social plan and weakens everyone else’s negotiating position. I am saying this plainly because four colleagues have done exactly that since June. Second: if a manager invites you to a “voluntary transfer conversation”, you may take a works council member with you. Use that right. Third: send us facts for the site file, customer orders that depend on the rail link, special shifts Wunstorf handled, anything concrete. Specifics count, including at advisory-board level.
The decision comes on 28 August. By 4 September at the latest, the next meeting will be here, whatever the outcome. Until then, you can reach us every day in the works council office, and what we know, you will hear from us first.
Why this speech works: The three-part structure gives an unsettled room something to hold on to: what we know, what we are doing, what you can do. The speech names legal sections and dates where rumours would otherwise spread, and it passes on the uncomfortable information too, that Lehrte leads in the report. That is what makes the counterarguments on rail access and certified drivers credible. The actions are concrete enough to write down: no fear-based resignations, take the works council into meetings, send facts. The ending commits only to what a works council can keep: availability and a date.
The pattern behind both speeches
Both speeches begin with the topic the room is waiting for, and both separate knowledge from assumptions. What is decided stands beside what remains open, and the open items get a date. That separation deprives rumours of material. If you are speaking to the workforce, whether as management or works council, first write down the three most uncomfortable questions and answer them in the text before they come up in Q&A. The full structure is explained on town hall speech. There, eloqole writes the draft from your key details.