Bit of a shocker, I agree with a trade union leader.

The joint general secretary, Derek Simpson, said: "There are currently one million agency workers in the UK who can be sacked without any notice … The current inequalities between agency workers and full-time employees must end."

Make all contracts contracts for hire (as the Americans call them).

No one gets any notice or statutory redundancy pay. That\’ll reduce the inequality.

It will also, over time, reduce the structural unemployment rate. It\’s a fairly standard assumption among a certain type of economist that such structural rigidities, by raising the risks and thus costs of employing people, reduce the number employed.

9 thoughts on “Quite”

  1. umm, I think you are wrong on the economics. For instance, in some models, if you make it more costly to fire people, you reduce the flows both into and out of unemployment. In other words, you predict longer durations of unemployment, but not necessarily a higher unemployment rate.

  2. Oh – and incidentally, while longer durations of unemployment sound like a bad thing (and they are for the unemployed) more security of employment sounds like a good thing for the unemployed, and the American model of high job turnover, more frequent bouts of low-duration unemployment isn’t necessarily preferable from a social welfare perspective (it might be; I just mean it cannot be assumed).

  3. You also of course assume that skilled workers wouldn’t get contracts that require huge payoffs or notice periods. Which seems idiotarian, really.

  4. “Make all contracts contracts for hire”: nah, we liberal types would prefer that employees and employers agree to any sort of contract they like, short of slavery.

  5. You are suggesting we should make changes to the real world because “a certain type of economist” has a “standard assumption”??

    Many types of people make assumptions – astrologers, creationists, professional climatologists, aristocratic dilettante climatologists, bookmakers, bankers, credit card companies, landlords, bailiffs, … They just vary ever so slightly in their reasonability and their impact.

  6. No one gets any notice or statutory redundancy pay. That’ll reduce the inequality.

    not sure if thats quite what Derek thinks he means

    surely as dearieme says just put in place freedom of contract then the employer/employee (s) can agree whats best for them

  7. Derek Simpson is a prat.

    “Not in my name”, mate!

    I am a contractor and proud of it. It’s part of my competitive advantage that I come into a firm, do what I do, very well indeed, and then disappear without causing them any headaches, redundancy pay, sick pay, paternity leave, etc.

    That is how I want to work. That is what my clients want.

    Butt out, Unions.

  8. What Andrew Duffin said.
    As a contractor I don’t want employment protection from the government. It just raises the cost of using my services. I would rather have the higher rate of pay that comes with providing a flexible service.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *