|
andy_s
8,462 posts
128 months
|
In theory, theory and practise are the same; in practise, they aren't.
I think it's a good thing if used as intended, unfortunately, having once been on the receiving end of mendacious and spiteful management, the best I can say is that I'm underwhelmed with enthusiasm.
|
|
|
B Huey
4,881 posts
68 months
|
Countdown said: B Huey said: Countdown said: B Huey said: Germany has very employee friendly employment laws, plus high wages. They seem to do OK. German workers are more productive. Because they have better rights and pay? Public sector workers have better rights and pay than most private sector workers. Doesn't make them automatically more productive.  I could go on about how much crap has just been dropped in my O/Hs lap re. the Olympics, 24 hr cover, 6 days on, 2 off for the next 4 months.
|
|
|
Chim
Original Poster
3,746 posts
46 months
|
B Huey said: Can anyone tell me how many jobs will be created by flushing all workers rights down the toilet? No one is suggesting that workers rights are "flushed down the toilet" as you put it. the system as it stands at the moment though is god awful and not just from an employer perspective, the red tape and regulation that surrounds the whole process is beyond belief. By removing some of this and allowing employers the capability to scale operations and remove "bad" workers without having to effectively bring your company to a productive stand still for many months at a massive costs during the worst possible time. This can and will lead to employers taking on more workers as they will know that they can operate flexible if things get rough. These are businesses, businesses exist to make money, they do not exist to employ people. The laws at they stand today mean that these businesses often have to carry these employees all the way to the bitter end and they can not scale to meet demand. No business likes to pay off good workers, they only consider it when its completely necessary. As I said, they exist to make money, they are not here to keep "facebook man" in the corner in a job or to carry a load of employes at huge cost when there is not the work for them to do.
|
|
|
DSM2
3,624 posts
69 months
|
Chim said: Countdown said: B Huey said: Germany has very employee friendly employment laws, plus high wages. They seem to do OK. German workers are more productive. The Germans are also a lot better at mass producing reliable products people actually want to buy, we unfortunately where really s  t at it. We were actually quite good at it until the TUs and Labour conspired to f k things up in the 60s and 70s.
|
|
|
BOR
3,122 posts
124 months
|
We have massively strong unions in Germany. What f ked things up in the UK was short termism and profit taking.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Adrian W
8,101 posts
97 months
|
I wonder if all the people on here saying this is good will still say that if they get fired rather than be made redundant
|
|
|
heebeegeetee
19,527 posts
117 months
|
B Huey said: Because they have better rights and pay? Possibly, and much, much better management too of course.
|
|
|
Hoofy
47,831 posts
151 months
|
Three things spring to mind in no order of importance.
-Employers won't sack someone on the spur of the moment unless they're an asshat because it'll cost a lot in time and money to recruit and train a replacement
-Employees may have to put up with abuse from scumbag managers who will push things knowing that they (the employees) could be sacked if they get arsey
-Will this apply to the public sector?
|
|
|
coyft
3,009 posts
80 months
|
As an Employer I think it's an excellent idea! If I were an average employee I would think it was a s t idea. Let's try it for a couple of years and see how we get on. 
|
|
|
heebeegeetee
19,527 posts
117 months
|
coyft said: Let's try it for a couple of years and see how we get on. You get to try it for a couple of years with every new employee you take on, don't you?
|
|
|
philthy
4,522 posts
109 months
|
BOR said: We have massively strong unions in Germany. What f ked things up in the UK was short termism and profit taking. Bullseye!
|
|
|
Eric Mc
67,253 posts
134 months
|
There will be no changes.
|
|
|
Eric Mc
67,253 posts
134 months
|
Chim said: Countdown said: B Huey said: Germany has very employee friendly employment laws, plus high wages. They seem to do OK. German workers are more productive. The Germans are also a lot better at mass producing reliable products people actually want to buy, we unfortunately where really s t at it. Because employers treat their workers better perhaps? Having said that, British car factories are amongst the most productive and efficient in the world.
|
|
|
andy_s
8,462 posts
128 months
|
Eric Mc said: Because employers treat their workers better perhaps?
Having said that, British car factories are amongst the most productive and efficient in the world. Under foreign management.... 
|
|
|
coyft
3,009 posts
80 months
|
heebeegeetee said: coyft said: Let's try it for a couple of years and see how we get on. You get to try it for a couple of years with every new employee you take on, don't you? It's the ones who have got their slippers on I'm interested in.
|
|
|
martin84
5,366 posts
22 months
|
In principle these changes can be very good if done properly, but I also take the point that making it easier to sack people will re-inforce the lack of consumer confidence and make people fear for their jobs, even if they have no need to fear for them. People emphasise the importance of saving money (quite reasonably) but if we all put every penny under the mattress we'll never get out of recession. The last thing the economy needs is everybody so scared for their jobs that they literally close ranks around their finances.
Really this is a change which should be made during good economic times in a growing economy where its positive points can have the most impact. I do think cutting red tape for employers is a good idea, I do think if its done properly it can really help the youth unemployment situation much more than any apprenticeship or grants system can ever do. Currently taking on an employee is such an expensive, time consuming process that it makes every potential employee a high risk, nobody wants to take on someone who seems less than perfect on paper due to the hassle of getting rid of them. If there was less risk attached to the hiring of younger, less experienced people then they could give more opportunities to youngsters to cut their teeth.
|
|
|
voyds9
4,054 posts
152 months
|
I would like the ability to give the employees the same notice as they should give me.
Happy to give 1 months notice.
|
|
|
Gaspode
2,683 posts
65 months
|
I'm not against these proposals, but isn't this what the existing system of using 'Compromise Agreements' is designed to get round? When I was 'got rid of' by my previous employer, this proved an easy way for them to get shot of me quickly without having to jump though hoops, whilst I got a nice little payoff in return for promising never to take them to court over the issue - which, by the way, was that I refused to move to Switzerland full time, rather than working there week on/week off as I had been doing.
|
|
|
rich1231
16,613 posts
129 months
|
B Huey said: I could go on about how much crap has just been dropped in my O/Hs lap re. the Olympics, 24 hr cover, 6 days on, 2 off for the next 4 months. She is obviously a hero to us all, but you don't half go on and on about it.
|
|
|
miniman
16,001 posts
131 months
|
New POD said: Having worked for a manger (or 2) in the past who was a t t, this is the worst idea possible. Why should good managers have ridiculous practices imposed on them because of the behaviour of bad managers? Your issue is that you have a bad manager, nothing else.
|
|
