So disappointed in the Labour manifesto and SME

[flyingvisit]

I feel like the policies are designed to destroy very small businesses. All the focus is on brick and mortar businesses , which are outdated.
If anyone knows any better, please explain it to me?

That’s great @TheWriteStuff - I had assumed they couldn’t honestly mean from day 1. I know a lot of the unions don’t really understand business but surely even they would see that probationary periods are vital. Phew!

It would still be tricky even within the probationary period though with new laws. ACAS is my best mate.

I commission in the NHS and we expect, even fixed price contracts, to request an increase if the Living Wage increases, we also insist all our contractors pay the Living Wage - you may find your commissioners expect the same.

sadly they dont (the govt one is fixed price..NHS are actually more generous, its true)

As an employer, we strive to be fair to our staff and treat them fairly - without them, we couldn't achieve anything. We don't use zero hour contracts. We pay the real living wage already. Our sick pay, annual leave etc
exceed the statutory requirements. We give new starters a fair chance to succeed in their roles regardless of how long they have been with us. And we have never needed to use fire/rehire because we have a lot of good will from staff who are generally willing to be flexible when changes have to be made because they know that we will not be unreasonable. So I'm not really concerned about any of the policies that Labour has outlined.

What's your biggest concern, OP?

Yikes, 3000 new nurseries can be opened from 35 million? So for 11k each?

And 5 million for language support in primary schools for the ever growing number of kids with speech delays? That’ll be pissing into the wind!

Thanks for asking.

I think the main thing, when I really think about it, is the day 1 stuff as that doesnt protect the business. Not all employers are bad, the assumption in these is that we are and just want to rip employees off. I find that premise very telling. We pay our staff well, we look after them when sick, we are flexible and dont use zero hours contracts.
Employers, however, have the right to some protection as well and I dont see where that is laid out.

This is a really good post.

Isn't this an illustration of what Labour is trying to achieve-decent employers who treat their employees well which in turn results in loyal employees who will be flexible and supportive?

Win-win all round.

As mentioned in my previous post - why is the assumption always that the employer is the bad guy? Its business protection, not a way to cheat people that we are hoping for.

Of course, employers need protection. But I don't think the Day 1 rights will have a huge impact on us tbh. Labour aren't saying that you can't get rid of staff that aren't performing. They are just saying that you have to go through a proper process and the employee can go to tribunal if that process isn't fair. We try to do this anyway, so I'm not really worried about it.

There are already protections in place for employees with regard to protected characteristics in any case, and we find that a lot of the most challenging issues with staff involve those with long term mental health issues. So we are already have to tread pretty carefully in any case.

I don't think that is the assumption, but there are a lot of employers out there who exploit their staff and treat them badly.

Oh come on @IClaudine Labour could’ve posted they were spending all their money on theme parks and you would’ve said it was a great idea

There IS another way, OP, to manage static income and increased overheads which is to accept a lower net profit.why not do that? Why is that never an acceptable option?

Not true. I am not a particular supporter of Labour in its current form and have a lot of criticisms of them.

I am more of a Plaid Cymru supporter, (but will probably vote tactically to ensure the Tory candidate doesn't get in).

Have you been taken to the tribunal before @Shortfatsuit ? I only ask because we also followed all the correct procedures to make an employee redundant and she is taking us to the tribunal claiming disability discrimination. Although we have reams of emails and documents setting out our process and her even saying that she didn’t need any reasonable adjustments, and we’re confident that we will be successful at trial, it’s still months of this hanging over us and at least £20k in costs if it gets to trial.

If everyone (and I know it won’t be everyone but a larger number than now) can claim for unfair dismissal as well as DD, this could cost businesses and their insurers thousands.

So even if you know you’re doing the right thing, there will always be some people out there who act like this.

With any political party there are Manifesto commitments, and there are the laws and regulations that get draughted, debated, amended, and enacted. If Labour get elected you know that the CBI, FSB BCC, etc. are going to be lobbying hard for workable solutions.

It sounds like you work in the care sector, or something related. And I think it's widely acknowledged that employment conditions in the sector are in general not particularly good. If these changes push the costs up for LAs and the NHS then this is not a bad thing if it reflects the genuine costs of a service that's fair to everyone involved, including the frontline staff.

Yes, we have on one occasion. The employee had significant mental health problems. We had bent over backwards to accommodate and couldn't have done any more. We won, but it was immensely stressful and time consuming at the time.

My point is, that can happen under current laws, as the trickiest employees that we've had have typically had poor mental health and could claim disability discrimination from Day 1 in any case. So we are already ensuring that our processes are robust, fair, well documented etc. Effectively, we treat any HR issue as if it could potentially end up in an employment tribunal at some point, so we dot the Is and cross the Ts etc. So there isn't really anything that would need to change in our current practices in response to these new policies.

Do you all have "proper" HR people doing your HR?

I agree @Shortfatsuit - we are also dealing with the mental health issues here too.

We use an outsourced HR company. I would far prefer to have an in-house HR person but we can't afford it. A lot of the HR stuff ends up coming back to me at the moment, and it can be very time consuming.

I may consider that in the future. I do all ours and I have no training, I'll admit. I'm learning on the go. We are more a S than M enterprise.

I am also disappointed. The Labour manifesto and the debates has not reassured me they won’t tax us if we sell our home. At least in the past they were direct. Now they seem to leave a lot of room for manoeuvres in a sort of sneaky way.

Yes, of course, Dianne Abbott did the number crunching!

National minimum wage is 11.44. Nobody with children can live on that salary without top ups from benefits.

People in full time work should not need benefits. How are you supposed to pay rent, council tax and run a car on that salary