The Employment Rights Act is an absolute nightmare for small businesses. It's likely to work out to be an Unemployment Rights Act particularly for the young trying to get their first job. It could well also end up being the "S*d this, I'm closing my business. The extra paperwork is last straw".
Employers have always moaned and whined about every single advance in workers' rights throughout history.
No doubt the slave owners of Alabama found the Abolition of slavery 'a nightmare', as did the coal mine owners when they stopped children going down the mines.
In more recent times, there were howls of outrage when women got equal pay for work of equal value and when the minimum wage and statutory paid leave came in.
Mate, we don't care how much you lot whine and whinge - workers deserve fair rights at work, end of.
Karl. If only it were FAIR rights. There are not many small business enterprises (SME's) whose owners/managers have the same rights as the people whom they employ. The owner is the one who comes into work when everyone else has gone home; the owner is the one who has to cover the shift of someone off sick; the owner is the one who has to try to ensure there is enough to pay everyone (and the Tax man). If you have never worked for a decent boss, try too, and see how much work some have to do. Not that many drive a top of the range brand new Mercedes or BMW. You have no idea of the stress and worry that a SME owner can have. I know some are, but please do not have this illusion that all bosses are B's because they are not.
Ian, with hindsight, my last sentence was a bit rude, and unnecessarily so.
But as to the rest of my comment, it is true that over the years, every advance in workers' rights has been met with similar complaints by employers. And in no instance has it led to disaster as the opponents predicted.
In fact, better pay and job security means more money in people's pockets that they then spend and thus creating a boost to the economy.
Perhaps. But you do not know what the effect of not implementing that legislation would have been, so you are making an unprovable assertion because you want it to be true.
Again, my point was about small business, larger businesses can absorb the extra overhead (although it will increase prices to the consumer).
I ran a small business with four employees. I had one part time employee who I would guess 25% of her time was spent dealing with Government legislation and the implementation of it. At some point the level of legislation becomes so high, you either decide not to bother expanding (therefore creating more jobs) or you give up and everyone loses their job.
Tosh. If you are running a tight budget, paying your staff more and being unable to get rid of those not pulling their weight does nothing whatsoever to boost the economy, rather more likely to have the whole company fail and lose all the jobs there previously.
The USA slave plantations were not only cruel and barbaric, they also held back the economy and prevented it from diversifying.
Children working down coal mines meant they were not at school learning to be the skilled and educated adults of the future.
And today, the children of families where the parents are in insecure and low-paid jobs are hugely disadvantaged themselves.
A company which claims it 'cannot afford' to pay the legal minimum wages and provide the statutory standards of job security should not be allowed to remain in business.
Sorry, but when your "stats" contradict personal experience I will believe my own experience over your stats every time, particularly when you are comparing what happened stopping the slave labour in the USA with what is happening in our SMOs in the UK today.
"Workers deserve their fair rights at work" Well quite! However, for balance, should you not , for the common good, speak also of fair rights AND RESPONSIBILITY !
It's good to see that common sense is, at last, beginning to prevail over 'transgender ideology' across society at large and you're right that our trade union movement urgently needs to catch up with public opinion on this.
Transgender ideology has no place within the wider equality agenda - in fact it contradicts sex equality because it perpetuates and draws its belief from Victorian-era gender stereotypes.
In a decade or so, people will look back on transgender ideology with utter bewilderment that any rational person could ever have seriously entertained this illogical notion.
It is just so absurd that unions support the trans cult over their actual members. These women could surely sue their unions for breach of contract. Despite the mood in the country changing and people not standing for this gaslighting nonsense, our institutions sadly are showing little sign of turning.
Why do the unions support a tiny % of their male members who suffer from a mental problem, ie. that they are not the sex they were born as, in taking away the rights of all the normal female members of the union?
Excellent article. I praise your honest forthright stance on this matter, we women need that true support and I thank you for your very balanced take on the matter Paul.
The Reformists are, at present, saying all things to all men. So they claim to support industry and workers etc, but they also have a profound belief in Thatcherite economics.
In opposition, as we've always seen with the Liberals for example, this can work fine. But in Government, hard choices need to be made and the Reformists will, inevitably, disappoint one side or the other of their support base.
Bravo for standing up for womens' rights, Paul. The trans cult needs to end.
I must take issue with you on the minimum wage laws, though. Their main 'benefits' are to price the young out of the jobs market and to suppress the wages of skilled workers. They also, as we're seeing at the moment in conjunction with higher employers' NI rates, help to put SMEs out of business. Thomas Sowell is excellent on this https://youtube.com/shorts/FXSOeQAUWzQ?si=mzb_r35pWb01ztQ3
The Employment Rights Act is an absolute nightmare for small businesses. It's likely to work out to be an Unemployment Rights Act particularly for the young trying to get their first job. It could well also end up being the "S*d this, I'm closing my business. The extra paperwork is last straw".
That'll really help with employment.
Employers have always moaned and whined about every single advance in workers' rights throughout history.
No doubt the slave owners of Alabama found the Abolition of slavery 'a nightmare', as did the coal mine owners when they stopped children going down the mines.
In more recent times, there were howls of outrage when women got equal pay for work of equal value and when the minimum wage and statutory paid leave came in.
Mate, we don't care how much you lot whine and whinge - workers deserve fair rights at work, end of.
Karl. If only it were FAIR rights. There are not many small business enterprises (SME's) whose owners/managers have the same rights as the people whom they employ. The owner is the one who comes into work when everyone else has gone home; the owner is the one who has to cover the shift of someone off sick; the owner is the one who has to try to ensure there is enough to pay everyone (and the Tax man). If you have never worked for a decent boss, try too, and see how much work some have to do. Not that many drive a top of the range brand new Mercedes or BMW. You have no idea of the stress and worry that a SME owner can have. I know some are, but please do not have this illusion that all bosses are B's because they are not.
Well done mate, an excellent example of false equivalence. You clearly have no idea about running a small business. 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Ian, with hindsight, my last sentence was a bit rude, and unnecessarily so.
But as to the rest of my comment, it is true that over the years, every advance in workers' rights has been met with similar complaints by employers. And in no instance has it led to disaster as the opponents predicted.
In fact, better pay and job security means more money in people's pockets that they then spend and thus creating a boost to the economy.
Perhaps. But you do not know what the effect of not implementing that legislation would have been, so you are making an unprovable assertion because you want it to be true.
Again, my point was about small business, larger businesses can absorb the extra overhead (although it will increase prices to the consumer).
I ran a small business with four employees. I had one part time employee who I would guess 25% of her time was spent dealing with Government legislation and the implementation of it. At some point the level of legislation becomes so high, you either decide not to bother expanding (therefore creating more jobs) or you give up and everyone loses their job.
When so-called improvements result in jobs being lost you should perhaps check your view?
But the historical record tells us that improvements in pay and job security don't cost jobs. In fact they boost the economy.
Tosh. If you are running a tight budget, paying your staff more and being unable to get rid of those not pulling their weight does nothing whatsoever to boost the economy, rather more likely to have the whole company fail and lose all the jobs there previously.
It's not 'tosh' though. It's historical fact.
The USA slave plantations were not only cruel and barbaric, they also held back the economy and prevented it from diversifying.
Children working down coal mines meant they were not at school learning to be the skilled and educated adults of the future.
And today, the children of families where the parents are in insecure and low-paid jobs are hugely disadvantaged themselves.
A company which claims it 'cannot afford' to pay the legal minimum wages and provide the statutory standards of job security should not be allowed to remain in business.
Sorry, but when your "stats" contradict personal experience I will believe my own experience over your stats every time, particularly when you are comparing what happened stopping the slave labour in the USA with what is happening in our SMOs in the UK today.
"Workers deserve their fair rights at work" Well quite! However, for balance, should you not , for the common good, speak also of fair rights AND RESPONSIBILITY !
Responsibility?
Yes of course.
The responsibility to have secure employment and to earn enough to provide for their family - 100% agree.
I think it fair to say that the Trades Union movement and the Labour Party no longer represent the interests of the working class.
Certainly Labour politicians despise the working class and only give lip service to the unions in order to keep their funding.
Couldn't agree more. As a retired member of Unite I hope my union has a better track record than most on trans issues.
This is a great post
You are absolutely spot on with this Paul.
It's good to see that common sense is, at last, beginning to prevail over 'transgender ideology' across society at large and you're right that our trade union movement urgently needs to catch up with public opinion on this.
Transgender ideology has no place within the wider equality agenda - in fact it contradicts sex equality because it perpetuates and draws its belief from Victorian-era gender stereotypes.
In a decade or so, people will look back on transgender ideology with utter bewilderment that any rational person could ever have seriously entertained this illogical notion.
It is just so absurd that unions support the trans cult over their actual members. These women could surely sue their unions for breach of contract. Despite the mood in the country changing and people not standing for this gaslighting nonsense, our institutions sadly are showing little sign of turning.
Why do the unions support a tiny % of their male members who suffer from a mental problem, ie. that they are not the sex they were born as, in taking away the rights of all the normal female members of the union?
Excellent article. I praise your honest forthright stance on this matter, we women need that true support and I thank you for your very balanced take on the matter Paul.
Reform now do a more effective job in many respects than Labour.
The Reformists are, at present, saying all things to all men. So they claim to support industry and workers etc, but they also have a profound belief in Thatcherite economics.
In opposition, as we've always seen with the Liberals for example, this can work fine. But in Government, hard choices need to be made and the Reformists will, inevitably, disappoint one side or the other of their support base.
I was in the FBU, they used to concern themselves with pay, conditions and safety equipment.Now it’s all identitarian nonsense.
Is anyone thinking of starting a new union that will defend women.
Bravo for standing up for womens' rights, Paul. The trans cult needs to end.
I must take issue with you on the minimum wage laws, though. Their main 'benefits' are to price the young out of the jobs market and to suppress the wages of skilled workers. They also, as we're seeing at the moment in conjunction with higher employers' NI rates, help to put SMEs out of business. Thomas Sowell is excellent on this https://youtube.com/shorts/FXSOeQAUWzQ?si=mzb_r35pWb01ztQ3