networkn:

 

Rikkitic:

 

networkn:

 

It's a nightmare for a small business under a Labour Government. The repealing of the 90 day thing is especially difficult. Apparently they are going to replace it with a fast simple system, which I imagine will be something like: 

 

If you employ someone, no matter how unsuitable they are for the position, what they do or don't do, how they behave, you will need to pay them a years salary to get rid of them.

 

What Labour continues to misunderstand, mostly because no-one who is a Labour MP has ever run a business or had responsibility for staff, is that as a business owner, staff are your biggest asset. If a staff member is good, you will do everything you can to keep them. Equally, if it's required to remove someone from your business, the costs are already significant.

 

 

 

 

As an employer, do you really need 90 days to determine if an employee is suitable? This is a genuine question. I have never been en employer but I would think that if someone was not up to the job or had hidden character flaws, that would become fairly obvious within a month. How important is the 90 days, really?

 

 

 

 

Yes, in my profession 90 days is minimum. I have had staff I've had a pretty good feeling about after a few weeks, others take time to learn the breadth of the job, prove they can handle paperwork. There is a lot of work that goes into good employees in a service business. Some people are good hamsters can churn away at preset jobs but can't really cope with stuff outside the normal, other people can be a bit more flexible but don't handle paperwork/record keeping.  

 

Outside of the 90 days, there is a series of steps required to remove someone from a business position, which involves meeting, outlining shortfallings, providing support to help them acheive the requirements, more meetings more support. It can *easily* take 3 months unless someone did something seriously bad, and even then...  

 

During the 90 days, I would typically meet with new staff many times, making sure they are comfortable in the role, letting them outline issues, raising our own, trying to work together to get a solution to issues that works for everyone. 

 

I have had bizarre situations where people have made up CV's, with invented certifications and forged certifications lied about attending onsite etc. That same person provided fake references.

 

 

 

My wife - when she had to employ staff - found that the impact of the 90 day rule was that those parasitic leeches who were smart and deceptive enough to bluff their way through the interview process were also always smart enough to be able to keep the bluff up until day 91 - when they became "permanent".

I don't think it makes much difference.

I've been running a service business for a friend for a while.  I can see the frustration that entails, it's a good business (that I didn't manage to destroy LOL) but extremely hard to get staff who'd share the vision when on wages - and without the vision, you're doomed.