h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

<< The fact that if it comes in Employers can make it a take it or leave it policy for new contracts does make me fear that it is a thin edge of the wedge

Ah, there is the rub.
This idea is being touted as a way of encouraging employers to take on more staff, but may end up having the opposite effect. If the employer says you don't get the position if you don't opt out of the EU protection, then I think many (who can afford to choose) will turn down the kind offer. The poorest, most vunerable and desperate in society may well have to agree.

Tellingly, Lord Sainsbury has said he is opposed to this initiative as "At a time we should be trying to re-built trust in business, this may well have the effect of building mistrust"

Yes--the question makes me think that, if a company is hard up enough for cash to try to make this "offer", how much are the shares going to be worth anyway? (On a side note, I remember once when my aunt was writing her resume, she observed that references were hard to list, because every place she'd ever worked for went out of business either as she left, or soon after)

I wonder if this proposed scheme is based on fundamentally flawed reasoning. Wouldn't we expect well cared-for workers to perform better than those who have far fewer rights?

>fundamentally flawed reasoning. <

Well, it was thought up by the tories, what else did you expect?

It's but a small part of the overall gameplan - to take the nation out of recession by making everyone poorer.

Seems straightforward enough to me. The government and employers are banking on people being greedy and stupid. Trading hard-won and important rights for the possibility of a "free" payout later... that's almost as bad a deal as a lottery ticket, where you trade hard-won and important money for a vanishingly small possibility of a free payout later.

And look how popular the lottery is... people are greedy and stupid. Nobody ever went bust assuming this.

Hoo, you miss the fact that some won't have any choice in the matter: if you refuse a job offer, no matter how inappropriate or exploitative that job may be, you get your benefits stopped.

It's not a case of greed for some, it'll be a case of them being coerced to give up their rights.

I'm not sure I've got a huge problem with that. If the job really is that inappropriate or exploitative, I don't suppose it would take long to get fired in a manner that would have you back on benefits.

It depends, I suppose, on whether you it's better overall to have people in low waged, poorly protected, exploitative jobs - or no job at all, where they're nothing but a drain on the resources of those who do work. Personally, once there's a minimum wage, and assuming that minimum is at an acceptable level, I think anyone offered a job should need a very, VERY good excuse for not taking it if they expect me to keep supporting them.

>>I don't suppose it would take long to get fired in a manner that would have you back on benefits.<<

You can't claim benefits if you've been fired, or have resigned.

>> I think anyone offered a job should need a very, VERY good excuse for not taking it if they expect me to keep supporting them.<<

To my mind 'it breaches my human rights and is against British and EU law' is a pretty good reason to refuse a job. I somehow don't think the Jobcentre will see it that way though.

"You can't claim benefits if you've been fired"

What - ANY benefits? I have to wonder how it is there are not more people starving on the streets. Or do you mean a specific, more generous benefit? It's been so long since I've been able to claim any benefit at all that I've entirely lost touch. It's been well over a decade since I was out of work, and that was due to redundancy. I was able to claim benefit then, although apparently at a reduced rate because I hadn't, apparently, paid enough national insurance to be entitled to the gold-standard benefit. I didn't get *nothing*, though. Has that changed?

I think if you've been dismissed for gross misconduct you are ineligible for Jobseeker's Allowance.

So let's see, in the Tory future, a worker is compelled to give up his rights, so he gets fired for no good reason, then can't claim any proper benefits, and is faced with either terrible hardship, or has to support himself by some other nefarious means. I wonder how this will affect the level of crime in our country?

Well obviously the cuts to benefits and shares for rights scheme will make the economy so buoyant nobody will want for anything so there'll be no crime.

"I wonder how this will affect the level of crime in our country?"

Probably less effect than the cuts being applied to the police force.

Oh I don't know bundle the two together and it will be a right party

Do police forces *have* shares?

I'm sure they will do once they are privatised

It looks as if companies will be able to give tax free shares to some employees in exchange for 'rights', and then return those same rights back via the employment contract, meaning that they just get tax free shares. Who will benefit from this new tax loophole? Why, only those whose shareholding would be enough to attract capital gains tax.

While I'm not such a cynic to think setting up another tax dodge for the wealthy was the intention all along, this does demonstrate a breathtaking degree of incompetence.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/oct/18/george-osborne-shares-rights-tax