No-fault dismissals would be catastrophic for Britain

A recent report, drawn up by Tory party donor Adrian Beecroft, called for employers to be given the right to dismiss unproductive employees with no explanation. Vince Cable will appear in the House of Commons in just half an hour to answer urgent questions from Labour’s Chuka Umunna regarding this report and any government involvement in this potential policy. I believe that Chuka Umunna and the Labour party must fight this proposal hard, as its implementation would lead to a huge backward step in the continuing search for worker’s rights.

Beecroft’s proposal argues that red-tape and bureaucratic rules (no doubt many brought in by EU legislation) make it far too difficult for employers to sack unproductive employees and as such businesses are being damaged by the continued presence of workers who do not pull their weight. Furthermore, it has been argued that the complex, legal processes involved in dismissing unproductive workers means that businesses are less inclined to employ new workers as they fear being unable to rid themselves of these workers if it turns out that they are incapable of doing their job effectively and professionally.

However, the truth about this proposal is that it remains part of an ideological agenda from the Conservative party to restore a Victorian era hierarchy in the workplace that makes employees beholden to their employers and in constant fear for their livelihoods.

Conservatives argue that the red-tape surrounding employer-employee relations has meant that businesses find the processes of hiring and firing too stressful and expensive an ordeal, leading to a lack of business confidence in job-creation. This, they argue, has a negative effect on the economy as employers are put off hiring workers and job creation is lowered, particularly damaging in a time of recession. However, this measure would have only a negative effect on the economy. If a culture of on the spot sackings was to be introduced into British business, we would soon find that, workers, in fear of losing their jobs, were hoarding capital rather than spending, as they lived their lives precariously balanced on a knife-edge waiting for the push of their employer which would send their household into economic oblivion, for no reason whatsoever. The amount of consumer spending therefore would inevitably drop were these proposals introduced and the economy would suffer as a result.

Furthermore, Britons have spent centuries fighting for, and gaining, rights in the workplace to protect the jobs of the most vulnerable in society. It is fair, and right, that an employer should give a credible, fair reason for the dismissal of any employee. Even given the rights won by Britons in the past, Britain still has relatively low workers’ protection legislation when compared with much of the developed world, so to strip away the few rights that British workers have would be wrong.

We cannot make it acceptable for employers to arbitrarily remove jobs from the working-class on a whim. This would lead to the abuse of employees and have a detrimental effect on the economy. The Labour party, in tandem with the unions, must protect the rights of British workers and not allow ideological conservatives to return Britain to a state whereby workers are vulnerable to the business and upper classes.

Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

3 responses to “No-fault dismissals would be catastrophic for Britain

  1. Pingback: Adrian Beecroft « Representing the Mambo

  2. Botzarelli

    Thanks for the comment on my blog on this.
    http://botzarelli.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/beecroft-boohoo/

    I don’t see this as a class war matter in the same way as you, unsurprisingly, but do think the proposal is an answer to a question that nobody is asking. The ability to remove non performing workers without going through formal performance management processes exists already. All an employer has to do is to make a suitable offer of compensation. The cnfd proposal simply puts a statutory minimum on the offer size. There’s no evidence that this is needed and beecroft seemed to be unaware that the option already existed as a matter of general employment law. The current balance, which requires the employer to work out what the employee could get if they were successful at alleging an unfair dismissal and the chances of them doing so seems to be a fair and impeccably economically liberal approach. Beecroft is proposing socialism for the rich!

  3. ojb42

    The pursuit of greater business efficiency is a race to the bottom. What’s the point of having the most efficient country on Earth if pay rates are low, workers live in constant fear of being fired for no reason, and conditions must be continually undermined to compete with other countries with poor wages and conditions? Its a farce and people should not be afraid to say they don’t want to have anything to do with it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s