Is it just me or ........

[widler]

personally i think you should be able to get rid of who ever when ever you want,without paying redundancy or being taken to court.

if a employee is useless you should be able to get shut,if the business is struggling,say because of recession,you should be able to get shut without having to pay over 10 grand out in redundancy to 2 employees,who have been kept in employment,paying them good money for years,keeping a roof over there heads,feeding there kids,even when times are hard,even if it means the employer aint took a wage for nearly 18 months out of 24,but still under bloody laws you have to pay them or be taken to the cleaners.
to much is given to employees and not enough to employers IMO,and 12 times out of ten,it is only employees who agree with the current laws and i don't know 1 employer who agrees with it.

gosh, i was ranting then

 

[Deleted member 9966]

personally i think you should be able to get rid of who ever when ever you want,without paying redundancy or being taken to court.

if a employee is useless you should be able to get shut,if the business is struggling,say because of recession,you should be able to get shut without having to pay over 10 grand out in redundancy to 2 employees,who have been kept in employment,paying them good money for years,keeping a roof over there heads,feeding there kids,even when times are hard,even if it means the employer aint took a wage for nearly 18 months out of 24,but still under bloody laws you have to pay them or be taken to the cleaners.
to much is given to employees and not enough to employers IMO,and 12 times out of ten,it is only employees who agree with the current laws and i don't know 1 employer who agrees with it.

gosh, i was ranting then

you can do it this way too.... provided that your contracts of employment state that the employer is entitled to lay people off at times of downturn. but the chances of you getting employees to sign up to those terms is pretty slim.

I agree, employment law is onerous on very small businesses but it works very well at keeping large, multi-national, massive profit-making companies in check.

 

[Muse2k8]

In my experience, it isn't the HR people that are inexperienced or lacking in knowledge. More often than not, they are constrained by management views and working practices that are out of date.

Employment Law is a huge beast and Vince Cable is dabbling in something that works well as it is. Businesses will not benefit from being able to dismiss someone with very little comeback on them, because the dismissed employee will then go straight to Tribunal to seek redress. And then both employees and employers end up lining the pockets of the lawyers to unpick a situation that would have been relatively straightforward if management has merely got their act together sooner, gathered evidence of whatever the problem, sat down with the employee to seek improvement and gave them time to try and improve. It then costs nothing because you have followed the correct process and if the employee still fails to improve, you can dismiss. This can be about underperformance, lateness, sickness absence, misconduct, gross misconduct.

I agree... Just in this case even though my employee was useless and damaging the business and losing sales by pretty much slating the product (in one instance a gentleman had been in to us in the morning and went all over town during the day and then came back because he loved our product, this staff member still managed to talk him out of it!).

Our policies were that HR dealt with all disciplinaries and dismissals from head office and they still wouldn't do anything about it!

 

[Deleted member 9966]

I agree... Just in this case even though my employee was useless and damaging the business and losing sales by pretty much slating the product (in one instance a gentleman had been in to us in the morning and went all over town during the day and then came back because he loved our product, this staff member still managed to talk him out of it!).

Our policies were that HR dealt with all disciplinaries and dismissals from head office and they still wouldn't do anything about it!

so technically not HR that were the problem, the company's approach to how things were handled was wrong. there's no point having HR handle disciplinaries or under performers because HR are not the people that manage them on a daily basis. managers manage, HR people are there to make sure managers get it right.

 

[Deleted member 1779]

At a factory on our Estate the boss has 12 workers and had a disruptive employee. Called him into the office and gave him £2000 in cash and said thats it you are fired and its all you are getting. If you want the cash sign the form. If you want to sue leave the cash on the table. Employee took the money. Never heard of again. Set an example to the other guys to tow the line. PS: What the employee did wrong (the last straw) was take his 5 year old child into work on Saturday. And he was filmed.... So they worked quickly to get rid of him.

Not saying any rights or wrongs just thats what they did.

 

[widler]

you can do it this way too.... provided that your contracts of employment state that the employer is entitled to lay people off at times of downturn. but the chances of you getting employees to sign up to those terms is pretty slim.

I agree, employment law is onerous on very small businesses but it works very well at keeping large, multi-national, massive profit-making companies in check.

aye,agree GRR,its always the little people who pay the price.

i have a employee at the mo,fractured his wrist playing football,so has got a sicknote for 8 weeks,he is taking all that 8 weeks as well,and the way he is talking it will be more,i now have had to employ a lad to do a job which he could do with one hand,but he would rather stay at home with his SSP and put his feet up.
I have been back to work straight away with a broken shoulder also 2 weeks after i had my appendics out,both when i was serving my time in the 80's,i wanted to work,and was frighterned of loosing my job,
i also went back to work last year the week after i came out of hospital with a bleed on my brain,just so i was not leaving the lads to try and get the work done.
some people think that they are doing you a favour by them working for you,when in fact its the other way around,we are the ones taking risks,so we are the ones who should reap the benefits ,when and IF they materialise,which to most small firms,its a rarity

 

[Deleted member 9966]

Widler

if there are reasonable adjustments you can make to this lad's working environment so that he can do certain jobs requiring only the use of one hand, you are quite well within your rights to ask him to return to his GP and find out whether these adjustments are suitable bearing in mind the fractures. Fair enough, he might not be fit to do the manual work associated with your trade, but there's nothing to stop him booking materials, overseeing deliveries, ringing customers/suppliers, doing some paperwork etc. That way he can be back at work earning his full pay.

Better for him to be at work instead of sitting at home. You can always ask. If you don't ask, you don't get.

 

[widler]

Widler

if there are reasonable adjustments you can make to this lad's working environment so that he can do certain jobs requiring only the use of one hand, you are quite well within your rights to ask him to return to his GP and find out whether these adjustments are suitable bearing in mind the fractures. Fair enough, he might not be fit to do the manual work associated with your trade, but there's nothing to stop him booking materials, overseeing deliveries, ringing customers/suppliers, doing some paperwork etc. That way he can be back at work earning his full pay.

Better for him to be at work instead of sitting at home. You can always ask. If you don't ask, you don't get.

trust me,i have asked,his reply,these are his words "nah,ive got another 2 weeks,then pot off,then xray,and maybe if its right back to work".
personally its about what i have done for him this past 2 years,helping him out ect ect, he is taking the urine,i let my lads do what they want,im not a stress head,im a good boss,ive never had a lad do this to me,i expect as much respect as i give them.
but when he comes back,no more picking him up and dropping him off at his door,no more early darts,no more days off when we are quite with pay,no more using his phone in work time,his life is gonna be hell :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Deleted member 9966]

trust me,i have asked,his reply,these are his words "nah,ive got another 2 weeks,then pot off,then xray,and maybe if its right back to work".
personally its about what i have done for him this past 2 years,helping him out ect ect, he is taking the urine,i let my lads do what they want,im not a stress head,im a good boss,ive never had a lad do this to me,i expect as much respect as i give them.
but when he comes back,no more picking him up and dropping him off at his door,no more early darts,no more days off when we are quite with pay,no more using his phone in work time,his life is gonna be hell :smilewinkgrin:

more fool him for accepting his situation. jobseekers allowance is less than SSP :smilewinkgrin: