Employment law is bad for the economy

In turbulent times, companies need to be staffed by the best employees they can get. There is no place for people who are not capable enough. However, current UK government legislation continues to make it harder and more expensive to fire employees.

The City is a leading global financial centre witch depends on its ability to hire and fire employees as simply as quickly, compared with other European jurisdictions. The U.S system of ‘employment at will’ is a system by witch an employment can be terminated at any time, for any reason, without notice. The ‘employment law’ is different. It is a nineteenth-century law and it is based on the concept of liberty of contract. An employee had the freedom to bargain with an employer for terms of employment. This concept was challenged when employees organized into unions and engaged employers in collective bargaining.

Firstly, for an employer to hire an under-performing employee, the law requires that the employee gets the chance to learn the job, they have a probation time and during that specific timeframe, the employer will control him.

Imagine that the employee is not capable at all to perform the job, then the employer must call him to a disciplinary hearing where he can say why the employee is not capable to work for him. The allegations against the employee must be written and the employee must have the time to prepare himself for the hearing. Investigations and witness statements must be taken and all of this gets the employee. He may see those documents before the hearing. The hearing is over and the employer thinks that he fired the employee. The employee has two choices: he can raise a grievance (make a complaint) or he can appeal which takes time and money.

Unsurprisingly some employers are using the current economic crisis as an opportunity to get rid of employees who are not doing their job well enough. Employee representatives must be elected if there are no union representatives. It involves meetings, numerous letters to the employee and an obligation to make efforts to try to find the employee suitable alternative employment.

Case law, European Directives and government policy are creating needless obstacles that employers will have to negotiate, instead of getting on with the job. The law needs urgent simplification.

I have a double opinion. On one hand, I agree that the employment law needs simplification so that it doesn’t cost so much when an employer wants to fire an employee who is not doing his job. On the other hand, the employment is good because now an employer needs a reason to fire an employee. He can’t just say that he is fired and that’s it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/6222110/Why-employment-law-is-bad-for-the-economy.html

Daphné V.E.