Hiring and firing

[HeadingNorth]

I don't see what's wrong with the system as it is. Even if took to tribunal, if a sacking was done for a genuine reason, they'll have no case to answer.

 

But they will have to waste time and money on the tribunal.

[Mecky]

But they will have to waste time and money on the tribunal.

 

So you think it's acceptable for a business to shoot an employee and not have to face justice?

[HeadingNorth]

So you think it's acceptable for a business to shoot an employee and not have to face justice?

 

If they have a valid reason for dismissing someone, then there is no justice for them to face.

[ampersand]

If they have a valid reason for dismissing someone, then there is no justice for them to face.

 

but without an independent arbitrator, how do you know if the reason is valid?

[chem1st]

We have a two tier workforce in this country;

 

One tier is generally older and white. And has 'rights', decent pay and conditions.

 

The other tier is generally younger and contains many immigrants. This tier has 'no rights'. Low pay, if any at all, and can be fired within a minutes notice.

[tinfoilhat]

but without an independent arbitrator, how do you know if the reason is valid?

 

Just to make sure I understand your point, companies should have an independent arbitrator to get rid of a rubbish employee who could be costing a small business thousands. That process in itself will take more time and money.

 

I honestly think that most people think the average entrepreneur does nothing but count his millions, occasionally stopping to whip his employees before banging his secretary, then a round of golf.

 

Try it folks, if it's that easy.

[Vague_Boy]

So how are companies supposed to grow in an upswing if they don't take on new staff?

You grow, then you take on the new staff, as the workload increases. You don't take people on if there's no work for them.

 

Clearly you are no businessman. Public sector? On benefits? Those would be my guesses.

 

Business Secretary Vince Cable said he wanted the process for getting rid of staff to be "simpler and quicker".

At the place I used to work we had a complete plank, totally useless. Yet we had to go through months of warnings and consultations before we could do exactly what we wanted to on day 1, fire him. What a waste of time and money.

[ampersand]

Just to make sure I understand your point, companies should have an independent arbitrator to get rid of a rubbish employee who could be costing a small business thousands. That process in itself will take more time and money.

 

I honestly think that most people think the average entrepreneur does nothing but count his millions, occasionally stopping to whip his employees before banging his secretary, then a round of golf.

 

Try it folks, if it's that easy.

 

Just for the sake of clarity, no you have completely misunderstood my point, which is, quite simply, that an employee should have protection from an unscrupulous/unfair employer

 

The post I responded to said that there was no problem with an employer dismissing someone if they have a valid reason (it's a paraphrase but I don't think I've altered the meaning)

 

The problem I have with that argument is that, just because an employer thinks they have a valid reason doesn't mean that they have.

 

If an employee is, in his/her opinion, unfairly dismissed, he/she should have the right to challenge the dismissal and, if their case is proven by an independent arbitrator (currently an employment tribunal) they should be properly compensated - the number of employees a company has should be irrelevant.

 

If the employee is validly dismissed and "costing a small business thousands" I don't have a problem with it, but an employer can't be judge, jury and executioner

 

I jointly own and run a business which is an employer (although I would never use the word entrepreneur thank you) and we have been on the wrong end of an employment tribunal decision - and we are wonderful employers!

 

I have no problem with crap employees being sacked, but there has to be a right to redress if you are wrongly dismissed

 

Hopefully now you understand my point, even if you don't agree with it

 

Got to go as I've got employees who need banging and a secretary who needs whipping and those millions won't count themselves