Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

King's Speech-worker's rights..

206 replies

CurlewKate · 16/07/2024 18:09

Apparently, the government is proposing legislation that will make protection from unfair dismissal a day one right- not as it currently is and kicking in after 2 years. Huge if true.....

OP posts:
User6874356 · 18/07/2024 12:11

DinnaeFashYersel · 18/07/2024 10:53

As an employer that was my first thought.

But on reflection here is my second thought.

It's protection from unfair dismissal - which to be fair is the right thing to do. What employers need to do is ensure that any dismissal is fair. And that is what we have to do after two years. So it just means we have to act properly from day one. Good employers shouldn't have a problem with this.

What it will do is change how we recruit. We will need to put more in up front to ensure that we hire the right candidates. Just now I am far more willing to take recruitment risks, roll the dice and try people out. Because I know that if it doesn't work out then the risks of dismissing them are low. I will be less willing to take that risk. So our recruitment will need to be more rigorous.

Edited

with respect you obviously don’t understand employment law or processes. A fair dismissal requires both dismissal for a fair reason and a proper process. Generally that means, for example, a dismissal on grounds of competence should have a performance improvement plan of around six months or so. It’s utterly disproportionate to impose that on employers from day one - a reasonable period where employers and employees can move on without consequence is the best balance for both parties and is fairest and best for the economy.

thecatsthecats · 18/07/2024 12:12

Ozgirl75 · 17/07/2024 06:58

I’m an employer and initially I was very nervous about this. Not because I’m in the business of unfairly dismissing people, but because sometimes people start working for us, and just aren’t very good, and we have to move them along within their probationary period. If I had to deal with a long and complicated dismissal process every time I took someone on, I just wouldn’t hire people from the U.K., or seriously consider if responsibilities could be taken on by existing employees.

However, from what I have read, probationary periods will still apply.

Secondly - the pure hassle and cost of dealing with claims, even if you’re confident you haven’t done anything wrong, is so punitive, especially for small businesses. We have dealt with a disability discrimination claim before which we have written proof isn’t going to be successful, and yet it has still taken over 18 months of our previous employee refusing to consider the evidence and sticking to her position, and has cost us at least 25k to defend.

So anything that leads to increases in ability for people to claim is going to be costly and time consuming for employers.

In general I’m in favour of robust employee rights as we treat our employees very well, but the consequence will obviously be fewer people being taken a chance on. Eg we took on an 18 year old who was keen but with zero experience - knowing that if he was hopeless we could move him on. If we had the risk of a claim from day 1 we would not have taken that chance (he luckily wasn’t hopeless!)

I agree with this.

I dealt with a case where the previous management were proud that there had "never been a sacking or failed probation". However, there had been rife bullying (by bad managers left with staff they weren't allowed to fail on probation), endemic poor performance by people simply unsuited to the role, and really bad behaviour just ignored.

I ended up in charge of fixing the work culture, and had to fire a woman who is transpired had racially abused a member of the public during her probation, whilst on company time.

I think a good compromise would be a managed exit process - a right to a three month notice period from the employer, with right to time off for interviews. Or some sort of "no fault" dismissal.

So you can be fired, but given a "gentle landing" into a new role, time to find it etc.

User6874356 · 18/07/2024 12:13

NameChange101113 · 18/07/2024 11:18

I’m going through an ET now. My ET1 was accepted in June, and I’ve already got a date for my final hearing(s) in December.

Maybe waiting times are area specific?

It also depends on the complexity of the case.

User6874356 · 18/07/2024 12:15

cupcaske123 · 18/07/2024 12:09

If I had to deal with a long and complicated dismissal process every time I took someone on, I just wouldn’t hire people from the U.K.

I don't understand what this means. Are you suggesting that you would employ a foreign worker and treat them differently to a UK worker? You do realise that they'd be covered by UK law irrespective of where they're from.

Secondly you could take the inexperienced person on under a probationary period.

Presumably she means she would move business elsewhere. As companies often do is response to onerous employment rights in any country.

Ozgirl75 · 18/07/2024 12:15

No, what I mean is that I would consider looking to overseas companies to provide (eg) admin support services.

As ive mentioned in further posts, I believe there will be probationary periods anyway, in which case this would be less of a concern.

MargoLivebetter · 18/07/2024 12:19

The text below is from the Guidance document about the Employment Rights Bill. Apologies if it has already been posted somewhere. If gives a bit more details about what they are planning to do.

What does the Bill do?
● The Government is committed to delivering its New Deal for Working People in full. The Bill will deliver on policies as set out in the Plan to Make Work Pay that require primary legislation to implement. The Plan includes commitments to the following:

o banning exploitative zero-hour contracts, ensuring workers have a right to a contract that reflects the number of hours they regularly work and that all workers get reasonable notice of any changes in shift with proportionate compensation for any shifts cancelled or curtailed. This will end ‘one sided’ flexibility, ensuring all jobs provide a baseline level of security and predictability.

o ending the scourges of ‘Fire and Rehire’ and ‘Fire and Replace’ by reforming the law to provide effective remedies and replacing the previous Government’s inadequate statutory code.

o making parental leave, sick pay and protection from unfair dismissal available from day 1 on the job for all workers. We will continue to ensure employers can operate probationary periods to assess new hires.

o strengthening Statutory Sick Pay by removing the lower earnings limit to make it available to all workers as well as the waiting period.

o making flexible working the default from day-one for all workers, with employers required to accommodate this as far as is reasonable, to reflect the modern workplace.

o strengthening protections for new mothers by making it unlawful to dismiss a woman who has had a baby for six months after her return to work, except in specific circumstances.

o establishing a new Single Enforcement Body, also known as a Fair Work Agency, to strengthen enforcement of workplace rights.

o establishing a Fair Pay Agreement in the adult social care sector and, following review, assess how and to what extent such agreements could benefit other sectors.

o reinstating the School Support Staff Negotiating Body, to establish national terms and conditions, career progression routes, and fair pay rates.

o updating trade union legislation so it is fit for a modern economy, removing unnecessary restrictions on trade union activity – including the previous Government’s approach to minimum service levels – and ensuring industrial relations are based around good faith negotiation and bargaining.

o simplifying the process of statutory recognition and introduce a regulated route to ensure workers and union members have a reasonable right to access a union within workplaces.

Megifer · 18/07/2024 12:22

I also predict a rise in PIP triggered work related stress that will add on more time to the dismissal process.

At least occ health providers will do well out of this!

LuAnnaFan · 18/07/2024 12:24

Ozgirl75 · 18/07/2024 12:15

No, what I mean is that I would consider looking to overseas companies to provide (eg) admin support services.

As ive mentioned in further posts, I believe there will be probationary periods anyway, in which case this would be less of a concern.

Probationary periods aren’t going to help. You’ll still need to follow a process.

Ozgirl75 · 18/07/2024 12:25

I wonder how they will square the circle of day one rights with the probationary period.
The protection for mothers is an interesting one - I’m glad I’m beyond child bearing age as I can imagine that would be a definite disincentive for some companies to take on women.

LuAnnaFan · 18/07/2024 12:25

Presumably protected conversations and settlement agreements will still be a thing? Costs money but might allow an employer to swerve a drawn-out process and avoid a claim on the back of it…

Ozgirl75 · 18/07/2024 12:26

LuAnnaFan · 18/07/2024 12:24

Probationary periods aren’t going to help. You’ll still need to follow a process.

I assume so - it’ll be interesting to see what that process would be.
Im glad we don’t need new staff!

Ozgirl75 · 18/07/2024 12:28

LuAnnaFan · 18/07/2024 12:25

Presumably protected conversations and settlement agreements will still be a thing? Costs money but might allow an employer to swerve a drawn-out process and avoid a claim on the back of it…

Edited

I can’t see how the law could ever intervene in these agreements between employer and employee - the employee normally does very well out of them after all.

Megifer · 18/07/2024 12:29

We'll probably just recruit temp initially or initial 6-12m FTC. Hope none of them will be wanting to apply for a mortgage!

Or if probationary period protected just increase it to 12m assuming there won't be a limit.

LuAnnaFan · 18/07/2024 12:32

Ozgirl75 · 18/07/2024 12:28

I can’t see how the law could ever intervene in these agreements between employer and employee - the employee normally does very well out of them after all.

You’d think, but they don’t work for discrimination cases, they aren’t protected. You’d be risking a discrimination claim just trying to have the conversation.

But I agree re straight unfair dismissal.

GiftOrNoGift · 18/07/2024 12:33

cupcaske123 · 18/07/2024 12:09

If I had to deal with a long and complicated dismissal process every time I took someone on, I just wouldn’t hire people from the U.K.

I don't understand what this means. Are you suggesting that you would employ a foreign worker and treat them differently to a UK worker? You do realise that they'd be covered by UK law irrespective of where they're from.

Secondly you could take the inexperienced person on under a probationary period.

probation is a red herring if day 1 rights are brought in.

GiftOrNoGift · 18/07/2024 12:34

Megifer · 18/07/2024 12:29

We'll probably just recruit temp initially or initial 6-12m FTC. Hope none of them will be wanting to apply for a mortgage!

Or if probationary period protected just increase it to 12m assuming there won't be a limit.

See above. Probation won’t achieve anything if day 1 rights brought in.

Megifer · 18/07/2024 12:36

GiftOrNoGift · 18/07/2024 12:34

See above. Probation won’t achieve anything if day 1 rights brought in.

Yea, which is why I said if probation protected, seeing conflicting info online about whether it will or not

(Protected as in day 1 is classed as the day after probation period passed)

LuAnnaFan · 18/07/2024 12:38

Could just put someone on a one year probationary period 😂

Ozgirl75 · 18/07/2024 12:38

Thing is, if we, on a chat board are aware of these difficulties, then surely there will be people saying the same thing to the government. Their plans all hinge around economic growth so presumably there will be a balancing act between the employer and the employee, especially now the economy is so global and it’s so easy to outsource overseas.

If companies have to allow for flexibility for example, then it makes more sense to hire cheaper WFH staff from overseas than from the U.K.

spuddy4 · 18/07/2024 12:48

LuAnnaFan · 18/07/2024 12:38

Could just put someone on a one year probationary period 😂

You can extend the probationary period, that's the road many employers will probably go down.

Ciri · 18/07/2024 13:13

spuddy4 · 18/07/2024 12:48

You can extend the probationary period, that's the road many employers will probably go down.

A probationary period has no legal meaning. It's just to set expectations.

If an employee is not performing within their probationary period they will have to be taken through a full performance management (capability) process before they can be dismissed.

Ciri · 18/07/2024 13:15

Megifer · 18/07/2024 12:29

We'll probably just recruit temp initially or initial 6-12m FTC. Hope none of them will be wanting to apply for a mortgage!

Or if probationary period protected just increase it to 12m assuming there won't be a limit.

There is no way they would "protect" a probationary period since that is exactly the same as having a short qualifying period and their commitment is to remove the qualifying period completely.

Megifer · 18/07/2024 13:19

Ciri · 18/07/2024 13:15

There is no way they would "protect" a probationary period since that is exactly the same as having a short qualifying period and their commitment is to remove the qualifying period completely.

I thought so but I have seen a few articles online that are a bit vague and could read as if there would be some sort of, I dunno, grace period for want of a better phrase.

If not I reckon we'll just go for temp or FTC initially.

Smigglewriggle · 18/07/2024 13:23

As a pp pointed out, expect loads of new jobs to be fixed term contracts or temporary contracts with the option to be made permanent after x number of weeks. Small employers are not going to want to be stuck with shit employees they can’t get rid of.

FinalCeleryScheme · 18/07/2024 13:52

Ciri · 18/07/2024 13:15

There is no way they would "protect" a probationary period since that is exactly the same as having a short qualifying period and their commitment is to remove the qualifying period completely.

I believe it was you who said upthread that you’re an employment lawyer (I’m also a lawyer but don’t specialise in employment). May I ask your view on the government’s announcement that’s been quoted above:

o making parental leave, sick pay and protection from unfair dismissal available from day 1 on the job for all workers. We will continue to ensure employers can operate probationary periods to assess new hires.

If probationary periods are legally meaningless - and I’m sure they are - what can the gov mean by a reference to rights on “day 1” and “employers can operate probationary periods”?

Is this just double-speak or is there a legally plausible way of reconciling the statements?

Swipe left for the next trending thread