green Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 The OP's link just seems to focus on the negatives. Surely someone has suggested this to the Chancellor and outlined the positives? If so, who did and what are they? Other than Rupert_Baehr's post I've not seen anything in the news about such benefits. Just like the Caravan Tax & the Pasty Tax its a policy thats been dug up for the Conference, to try and appease the party faithful, because their elite corporate friends have told them business is closed in the UK unless we get rid of employee rights, as they are a cost & burden to business. Expect another U-turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 As I asked earlier "Which rights?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Good post from the FT....... http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2012/10/the-fundamental-problem-with-osbornes-employee-ownership-plan/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 As I asked earlier "Which rights?" ... In return they will give up their rights on unfair dismissal, redundancy and the right to request flexible working and time off for training, and will be required to provide 16 weeks' notice of a firm date of return from maternity leave instead of the usual eight. http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/oct/08/employee-shares-for-rights-what-proposals-mean?newsfeed=true So basically if you were opt in you could be sacked at any time, for any reason, with absolutely no recourse or statutory redundancy pay (+ the stuff about mat. leave and flexible working). jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drone Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Don't ever sell your human rights for money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 This is yet another crackpot, ill-thought out scheme by this poor excuse for a Chancellor. Why can't the employees just have the shares without the punitive measures of giving up hard-fought for rights. If this means workers will work harder because they own part of the company, this in itself should make the business more competitive. Will the directors of these companies who will be presiding over more profitable businesses, be forgoing any of their rights I wonder? Why should the employee's get something for nothing? If someone invests thier capital and ideas into a business, why should they give up any share in that business for nothing? If you are an employee you get paid a wage. If you want shares you contribute something. That's either a forgoing of salary, using your salary to buy shares on the market, or bringing something useful to the company. In this case you are bringing labour flexibility to the company and as a result the company rewards you with shares in it. You don't get shares for nothing, to suggest otherwise is plain ludicrous and the politics of envy yet again. I've worked for a couple of startups before. The last one I joined and had no salary for a year and a half except just enough to keep my NI stamps paid. I got paid in shares instead. When that floated I made about thirty times what I would have expected to be paid as an employee doing the same job. Risk more - win more. Of course there is a downside as well and you have to decide if that risk/benefit is right for you. For some people it is, for some it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drone Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 It's a trick They know it's hard to dismiss workers that are not up to their standard Don't be a victim of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/oct/08/employee-shares-for-rights-what-proposals-mean?newsfeed=true jb One of the key details in your link is the phrase "Detail is scarce" under the section How will it work? But it hasn't stopped everyone pushing out their armchair opinion. This is the original Treasury press release: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/press_91_12.htm which calls the scheme "employee-owners". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 They know it's hard to dismiss workers that are not up to their standard Do you think that's a good thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplybusine Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 The proposal is understood by many as moving away from a social net/responsible business to a more capitalist, risk taking economy. Would you agree? Also, it seems these proposals may have very different implications for small businesses versus large corporations. Giving your workers' rights, while being employed by a large company seems less risky than doing so while being employed by a small business. What are your thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.