********Making it easier to sack bad employees*********

[rebel11]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345678/Making-easier-sack-bad-staff-Britain-work-claims-David-Cameron.html

[honeybee13]

I liked the comments after the article about MPs and bankers!

 

There isn't very much detail on how this will work, but looking at it from the employees' side of things, I remain to be convinced that these measures are going to help the economy. We see enough people here going through hard times with sick pay and other job issues, some of them with the very employers who are offering to take on more staff, according to the article.

 

I would be interested to know the thoughts of any caggers who are involved in ETs or running businesses.

 

Thanks for posting it, Rebel

 

HB

[rebel11]

Hi HB

 

They are talking about an employee having to be employed for two years before they can lodge a complaint with an Employment Tribunal and that employees will have to pay a fee.

[honeybee13]

Yes, I got that, 2 years instead of one, but I'm still sceptical about whether it will work.

 

My best, HB

[SarEl]

Yes, I got that, 2 years instead of one, but I'm still sceptical about whether it will work.

 

My best, HB

 

This used to be the law previously and it was not unexpected that the Tories would bring it back since they introduced it last time. It certainly cut the waiting lists for Tribunals since virtually nobody qualified!

 

Here are some arguments against - http://www.thelawyer.com/employment-law-has-it-really-gone-too-far?/1006533.article

Edited January 10, 2011 by SarEl

[Surfer01]

It also amazes me how they talk about supermarkets employing "x" number of people, but the wages paid to these people are probably just above the minimum wage. What they do not take in to consideration is the number of people a supermarket makes unemployed! This happens when the supermarket moves into a town and then undercuts all the local traders forcing them out of business.

Our High Street already has several charity shops who put absolutely zero back into the local economy as they are manned by volunteers and the rest of the shops will probably close when the new Tesco opens.

[rebel11]

The trade is 'If you give us jobs', we'll diminish 'workers rights'.

[meekmeek]

looks like government giving more powers to the rich businesses and less powers to the low paid worker who has not been able to learn a trade due to financial strain

 

i think all employees deserve the same rights whether with a company 1 year or 10 years making it easier for employers to sack employees will just create more of a culture of untrained and unemployed people living off benefits

 

many businesses use the one year rule to put people in low skill jobs as a temporary worker and if they worked and sucked eggs-brown nosed the boss theyd keep the job to get to the 12 months to get training into the 'proper job' the employee applied for

 

now having to brown nose for longer for low pay seems unfair

 

less job security less promotional opertunities if businesses extent their probationary periods due to new laws - just seems to aid the companies profits which lay in off shore accounts and not the worker who actually want to earn money to spend on stuff to keep economy alive

 

i am currently unemployed but if i was to take a job with a 2 year probationary period where i had to do more tasks then a same ranking worker who has 3 years experience and i had to do it for less pay then arguments in work would start - 1 seeking payrise for extra tasks asked of me 2- trying to even the work balance between me and other workers of same job title

 

this would be seen as negative and deem it easy for a employer to sack me just because i want to work to the same level as my peers

 

also 2 year probationary period would make me put my wages in a bank or better yet under my pillow and not spend it so that if the job does end i have savings to live on

 

i do not see in a practical world how expanding the probabtionary period is actually going to benefit the general population

 

after all businesses hide their profits well - think about it if they dont show a profit then they dont have to pay corporation tax

 

so they will just raise managers pay and bonuses and put money in their spanish summer home bank account which evades taxes

 

i just shudder to think what there next invention is - without trialling without thinking without knowing the outcome

[Surfer01]

An employer will take on someone and then just before Xmas sack them so they don't have to pay for Bank Holidays etc or perhaps even a bonus. People soon become disillusioned with this and then prefer to stay on benefits.

[hallowitch]

don't forget the added bonus for the government am i correct in thinking You can be sanctioned from benefits for up to 26 weeks, if you are sacked

[Surfer01]

don't forget the added bonus for the government am i correct in thinking You can be sanctioned from benefits for up to 26 weeks, if you are sacked

I think it depends on the reason. If they simple state your services are no longer required you should get benefits. If you theft, assault etc probably not. Actually if they introdcue this it could backfire on the government! They will have more benefit claimants and also be out of office in the next election!

I dislike Labur and have never voted for them and never will, but the Tories are now going the same way. Liberals have never entered the equation and never will so who the hell do you vote for next?

[Nobnob]

Actually if they introdcue this it could backfire on the government! They will have more benefit claimants and also be out of office in the next election!

I dislike Labur and have never voted for them and never will, but the Tories are now going the same way. Liberals have never entered the equation and never will so who the hell do you vote for next?

I agree. There's already a horrible cycle with more spending cuts equalling more job losses, hence more people on benefits, yet the govt want to reduce the amount paid out in benefit! - how's that going to work then!? And agreed on your point about voting - this will be my answer when I get nagged next election for not voting!

[SarEl]

Ok - this is not a "real problem" so I am going to go for it! This is SarEl being not at all diplomatic. Everyone deserves a holiday.

 

What on earth is the point of this thread if you are all going to sit around and whinge, opining about the lack of "voting choices"? Who gives a damn about your voting choices - voting has rarely changed a thing, anywhere in the world. And if this government survives its term - which I am personally doing every damned thing I can do to prevent! - then what it has done during that time will still be what it has done. And if you all do nothing about it - then you have done it too. The test of a democracy is not whether you trot down and put an X in a box every five years or so. Nor is it whether you have the imagination to think of someone to vote for.

 

I am not a Labour member or supporter (whatever that means) although I admit I often end up voting for them for the lack of any real alternative. And I also admit to having a clause in my living will that says if I ever vote Tory (rapidly being re-written to include Lib-Dem) I should be put down as brain dead. But as a democrat - and not one of the US wishy-washy versions) I believe that what the government does in in our hands. They cannot do anything against our will. So we can sit on forums whining - or do something about it.

 

This is old news. Lawyers have known for some time that this was coming. And anyone with an imagination didn't need to be a lawyer to work it out. My professional group - and my union - have been working on this for weeks, and we will fight back with every tool we have. We might not be enough and we might not win - but be damned sure that we will fight. I personally don't give a damn - it makes no difference to me. I can't be sacked, fairly or unfairly. But I believe that I have an obligation to fight for those who cannot (and sometimes will not) fight for themselves. So I am going to do it anyway - for someone else. A democracy is not about voting - it is about participating, and it is sometimes also about fighting back - it is always about doing something and not about complaining!

 

What the government intend to do is wrong. Whether it effects you or whether you think it will - it is still wrong. If you do nothing about it - then you are part of it. It takes more than "lodging a grievance" on an internet forum. That doesn't count. Stand up and be counted - or be part of the problem. Maybe I am old-fashioned, but I would rather be that than a party, in any way, to what this government is doing to destroy the fundamental rights of the poorest and most disavantaged people in our society.

[honeybee13]

Wow, SarEl, powerful stuff. I'm not quite sure what action could help in the fight if we're not in a lawyers' union. Sorry if I missed something you said [it's late], do you have any suggestions of how to go about objecting effectively please?

 

I for one am up for a fight, nothing to do with us being CAG friends, I just can't see the point in what they're proposing apart from helping big businesses.

 

HB

[SarEl]

Well - all unions will be fighting this, so if you are a union member, find out what you can do to help. There will shortly be some lawyers groups launching campaigns too, and there will be ways for people to help with everything from leafletting to demonstrations. In the meantime, write to your MP and get everyone you know to write too - especially if you are in a Lib Dem area - the coalition is sort of shaky! This requires a legislative change and will take time. So there will be more about this coming out. If anyone wnats details as it happens, I will happily update the thread as things become clearer.

 

PS - I believe that this sort of thing is now called "THE BIG SOCIETY".

Edited January 10, 2011 by SarEl
Addition

[Surfer01]

So what have we learned in 2,065 years?

"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled,public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance."

Cicero - 55 BC

[greendollar]

Wow, SarEl, powerful stuff. I'm not quite sure what action could help in the fight if we're not in a lawyers' union. Sorry if I missed something you said [it's late], do you have any suggestions of how to go about objecting effectively please?

 

I for one am up for a fight, nothing to do with us being CAG friends, I just can't see the point in what they're proposing apart from helping big businesses.

 

HB

 

PROTEST PLANNED FOR THE 26TH MARCH 2011

 

Assemble at 11.00 on Victoria Embankment between Blackfriars and Temple Place

 

March to rally at Hyde Park

[callumsgran]

This might help in the interim, a vote of no confidence for the ConDems

 

http://www.voteofnoconfidence.org.uk/addedvote.asp

 

Use your vote to get them out

[MONX]

This might help in the interim, a vote of no confidence for the ConDems

 

http://www.voteofnoconfidence.org.uk/addedvote.asp

 

Use your vote to get them out

 

Just did, lol felt good to put my twopenneth in!

[Surfer01]

We normally vote Tory and we do understand that they have to rectify a deficit problem caused by the previous government squandering all the resources by dipping into a bottomless pot etc, but now we feel that the cuts are too stringent and they are trying to make up a deficit that Labour ran up over 14 or more years in less than 5 years. This onto top of an increase in VAT and petrol is pushing many people in to a black hole from which ther is no escape as jobs are becoming very scarce!

If you are in your fifties, it is nearly impossible to get a job especially with thousands of public sector workers being made redundant in addition to bank and pharmacetical companies laying off people. Immigration policies don't help either and should be put on hold until we have sorted out ourselves in the UK.

If the ConDems are kicked out of office tomorrow, the next government even if it is a Labour government will do exactly the same thing so we are all in a no win siuation!

[SarEl]

I am not going to argue politics - but I will argue facts. The deficit that the country has was not run up over 14 years. In fact for the majority of that time, the deficit was at some of the lowest points that it had been at in over 30 years - certainly comparable (and in some cases, more than comparable) with the levels during the Thatcher period. Those are just simple economic facts. The decision of the last government, rightly or wrongly, to increase spending, was a direct response to global recession and the banking crisis - neither of which can be laid at the door of the British Parliament (or not on their own, and not even in a big way). They chose to do this by targetted public sector investment in a range of sectors - including, perhaps most notorioualy, the banks! This saw the deficit rise from a very manageable level to an unmanageable one within a short period of time. I am not defending their decision to do this, but I wonder, had the Tories been in power at the time, whether they would have done any differently either - especially since some of them own the banks or derive significant parts of their income from them!

 

Despite their apparent differences, both governments have landed in the situation they have found themselves in by adherence to the same economic model. Perhaps all ths really tells us is that (a) economics aiin't what it used to be if Oxford and Canbridge are only teaching one model and (b) we really are a small and insignificant country, and trying to pretend we are not is too costly for us.

[Surfer01]

As long as we agree to disagree on some polints, however you are quite correct about the wrong type of econommics being taught at univerisities. It seems that the previous government locked it self into using the Keynesian theory by employing hoards of public sector workers when this theory has been shown to be almost a self destruct button.

[MONX]

What is it with the Tories dislike of public sector workers?

 

The vast majority of them and I am talking somewhere in the region of 90% are your nurses, firemen, police officers, bin men, road sweepers, librarians etc. These are not the fat cats in Whitehall that reap in the big money for finding ways of messing things up!

 

Con/Dem are boasting about making 500,000 of these redundant, they have moved the goal posts for the redundancy payments so that they can get rid of them cheap and I am far from being any kind of economic expert but how can making these people unemployed possibly make things any better? The fact that there will be 500,000 families not taking holidays, buying new cars, getting mortgages and spending their earnings will have a massive affect on the economy and not the one the condems are expecting.

 

I could understand if the public sector workers were obsolete and not providing essential services but this will also have an impact on the surviving workers having to do more work with greatly reduced resources, it will take longer to see a doctor, you might have to wait for a fire engine because it is covering the area of three or four counties etc.

 

I am sorry this does not make sense to me at all.

[Surfer01]

Nothing wrong with those mentioned but in areas of the public sector, ther are too many backroom and unnecessary staff employed. You have three people doing the job of two. I have seen this. Unfortunately other needed staff fall into the firing line also.

[MONX]

I disagree, i work in the public sector we are expected to do more with less and have been since the economic turndown, since we all knew that we would be the countries whipping boy our department has "got rid" of essential workers and we are having to bridge the gap...i can see it collapsing if we carry on this way...then we will see how long it will take to get your benefits, passports, rubbish cleared, heart attack treated etc!