Steerpike

Somewhat related .... the whole European concept of it being hard to fire someone is not without its costs. A good friend of mine is a senior manger in a US company that has a big division in Holland. There are some really poor performers in that office, and she wanted to get rid of them (and replace them with better performers) the same way she got rid of some poor performers here in the US (verbal warning, written warning, performance plan, termination). There was NO WAY she could get rid of these people in Holland without going through a massive, time-consuming and expensive process (making the already arduous US process look like a cake-walk).

So in the end she said, screw it, we'll just keep them, but that's the last time we ever add people in that office, and the last time we give any mission-critical assignments to them. So that division is effectively stagnant now. I worked for a company that had a division in the UK, and again, we needed to get rid of a guy who was utterly useless - he did the absolute minimum to get by, never showing any initiative. We simply could not get rid of him. In the end we pulled all the work back to the US and did our UK implementations by sending people over, with the office eventually closing down due to lack of work (which is easier to justify ). These are not, I believe, isolated incidents.

Yes, jobs are 'protected', but - jobs are far less likely to get created in the first place because everyone knows how difficult it is to undo.

Tracym

Sounds like civil service workers.

Xebedee

How do I sign up?
Working for a living sucks.

Lothianlad

Plenty of British women think that doing just that and living in just those council owned sink estates is a very good "career" option indeed, and by making sure they drop a sprog or two at regular intervals all along the way, using men of instantly forgettable identity, they can screw even more dosh out of the tax liabilities the rest of us have to pay only to be squandered by a crap Government on the feckless drink and drug addicted chavs who wouldn't have a f*****g clue what a clocking in machine was or even the faintest desire to find out, and also on the feckless, over fecund chavettes who think it's their God given right for society to pour endless funds in their direction so that they can continue to gorge themselves with crapshite junk food while they sit on the sofa watching Jeremy Vile or Trasha Goddard or gobby overweight misandrist American crapshite TV talk show presenters, and then to waddle their mega sized backsides down to the supermarkets, trailing their sproglets along behind them while holding a fag in their hands, so that they can stock up on yet more fags and booze and pot noodles and even more takeaway easy cook slam in the microwave calorie busting crapshite junkfood.

All the while this f****g non-Government produces scheme after scheme after scheme after scheme and plan after plan after plan to bring about reforms to make this sort of thing no longer some kind of "career" option - but nothing concrete ever happens and nothing ever changes.

Now we have reports on the way gazillions of Eastern Europeans now prevalent all over the UK are using every dodge under the sun, inspired by the mentality of the past Communist regimes in their home countries, to screw every penny out of the UK benefits systems, and are even producing booklets and pamphlets directed at their own nationals on how best to avoid paying statutory taxes, how best to get the most they can out of the NHS, and even how best they can avoid paying utility bills using every kind of fraudulent ways and means they can think of, and how best to drive unisured and untaxed on Britain's roads, and at the same time flaunt every traffic regulation going, and anything else they can think of if it means "getting away with it".

Michael

Even though the US has never been considered to have a large safety net like much of Europe, similar things happen in the US.

While watching a TV program the other day, a single mother of two was explaining the government benefits that she was receiving. First she was receiving a government rent subsidy (section 8) of $600 per month of the $800 that she was paying. She was also getting welfare payments, food stamps, aid to dependent children, and free medical care for the family (medicaid). Then she was receiving $1500 per month for child care expenses so she could work so that she could possibly get off welfare in the future.

All in all she did not pay any taxes on any of the benefits even though she was receiving over $45,000 per year in benefits and income which is more than the average American income for an individual. Only because both a husband and wife work in the average American family do they make more than the welfare mother but not significantly since they pay a large amount of taxes.

I also have a BIL who worked in construction who claimed that he had a bad back about 10 years ago (age 40) and started receiving government benefits (social security and long term disability). He and his wife moved to Mexico and built a house there and the benefits that he receives provides him with a pretty decent lifestyle (at least 5x or more than the average Mexican income). When I was visiting he told me he did the majority of the work on the house himself with the help of 2 Mexican labours. He said that he along with the workers lifted 800 lb slate tiles on to the roof.

So if you know how to work the system in any country, it may not pay to work hard if you are middle class.

hockeyhairdo

There is so much hate and disrespect in Britain today, and perhaps hateful and critical people is the reason why so many decide to leave the UK.

You sound like a typical bitter, unemployed radicalist/nationalist \(but im only guessing here) who thinks that Britain used to be a paradise on earth before the "massimmigration"

Think about the 1980 in the industrial north of England, (hardly a pleasant place to live)

I couldnt possibly comment on the TV shows you watch, I am never at home at daytime.

Most of the "gazillions" of Immigrants, come here to get a job, earn money and then quickly return back home. (only Britain has websites called British Expats)

I have private medical insurance so I never use NHS, and if all Brits spent their money on a medical insurance and not on a 6 pack or take away, then perhaps we could scrap the NHS and therefore stop any immigrants to use the NHS.

After all, for all the NHS immigrants use in this country, it still doesnt level up of the cost drunk British tourist incur in Costa del Sol, and other typical Holiday destinations popular among the British middle class.

Tootsie Frickensprinkles

That was my initial reaction, I've worked private and public in the UK and I have experience and post grad qualifications in HR, I've seen it handled well and badly.

You can indeed get rid of bad performers although the process is longer and harder. I have seen HR depts go around the circles of making a role redundant as it can be quicker and has less potential risk. Public sector are less likely to do this though, they are also less likely to have an HR dept with the political or economic will to bother with the hassle.

I have never come across this attitude of we wont hire incase we cant get rid of someone, I've never heard it playing any part of recruitment planning strategy. Just because it is how American managers think, it doesn't mean it is how directors and managers think here, we work with the law we have here. Americans work with theirs and strategies are created around that, much like tax, avoidance isn't evasion.

I'm not saying the issue is not there, but I find the argument that viable private companies dont act on business or HR strategy in fear of the law quite out there. I've just never seen it, come across prohibitive planning strategy to avoid it, or heard a great deal about in text book or classroom discussion. I think it's a lot more attitude based, than fact based, certainly as far as the UK goes.

I do however believe recruitment and selection for positions is done quite differently here in order to avoid the situation in the first place. I'm also only talking in terms of UK, I've never worked at strategy level pan European and I have limited experience with different European countries employment Law. It could be a lot harder in Holland for all I know but following correct performance and disciplinary procedures, it's not *that* hard to get someone out in the UK if you really want to.

Michael

From my understanding the UK does not have as protective worker rights laws as many of the countries on the continent. For example, the EU has a rule that states that the maximum any employee can work under most circumstance is 48 hours per week. All countries in the EU except the UK has signed the agreement so that law does not pertain to the UK.

Also countries such as France have a very restrictive 35 hour work week as well as very restrictive layoff and firing policies. Many economists believe that is one of the main reasons France has a very low employement rate which is 15-20% below the US and UK and a high unemployement rate of 7-12% due to resistance by companies to hire people unless absolutely necessary.

UK workers do not significantly work less hours than US workers per year (about 1720 hours in the UK compared to about 1780 hours in the US) as compared to about 1400 hours in France. In my opinion that is one of the reasons that the UK has a per capita GDP ahead of both France and Germany (UK was behind both France and Germany in per capita GDP in the 1970s).

Tootsie Frickensprinkles

We've opted out of quite a number of EU things, althought there are important elements of the working time directive that have been adopted by the UK and into employment law. Employees do have to legally sign out of the 48 hour max, and employers are still forced to work with a lot of the paid and unpaid break regulations, etc etc.

The WTD is one of the things I probably have most experience of, working at the European HQ of a US owned company with finance systems based on a 40 hour timesheet requires an awful lot of work arounds for a French Office, in legal terms as well as reporting, policy and administration.

Having not studied detailed employment law outside the UK it's working knowledge and experience I base argument on. We dont have the tax rates and union laws of the continentals either but I hear the same arguments from Americans about work, life and business in the UK, basically lumped into one. It's quite infuriating how often its made in a critical, sneery and patronising manner too. Spose its one of the reasons my back goes up so quickly when I hear it now.

The UK work week is standard at 37.5, we're not tied to the Directive however and many contracts are 40 or more, with overtime real work hours of 45-50 in some cases. On the flip side, I see alot more people here take 4-5 + weeks off work including 2-3 at one time than I have ever personally seen or heard about in US workplaces. And going full circle, we do have protection much greater than the US, especially with respect to rights and attitudes concerning Maternity. It produces a different set of pay offs, and I suppose its all about what you want in life.

Tracym

Social Security Disability is actually quite a different thing from the other govt benefits.

It is not a needs-based system - it is insurance. You only get it if you've paid into it. The amount you get is based upon how much you paid in.

So the BIL worked for years, paid into the social security system for that disability insurance, and thus claimed it.

So him getting a goodly amount from disability insurance/social security disability does not bother me - that is the purpose of paying for disability insurance - so you can still live a nice if you are disabled.

Now... the issue that he appears to not actually be disabled - well that is of course another issue entirely.

Michael

The issue of the the post was not that someone should not receive social security and long term disability benefits if they deserve them but that some people in all countries can and do abuse the system especially for medical conditions that are difficult to diagnose (eg. back problems, depressions, mental issues, etc.). I suspect that if he was refused the benefits, he'd be working in construction in the US today. Also the major benefits he received was not from social security but from long term disability. However, he had to convince the social security administration that he was disabled or otherwise the long term disability would not be paid.

Tracym

I understood that point.

But you also made another point - how much money he was making from that, more than most families in the area.

The point I wanted to make in response to that second point, is that if one legitamately qualifies for social security disability, it is NOT a handout, but rather insurance a person has paid for.

So the fact that they get a good amount and lead an OK life should not be held against them and perhaps compared to the entirely different case of the welfare mother milking the system - those benefits ARE handouts..

hockeyhairdo

Spending hours of our working day on a web forum on how to leave the country may not be a handout, but surely it is a way of wasting investors and or taxpayers money... a mini fraud in itself...

Tracym

Mental health time?

hockeyhairdo

haha YES I definitely agree.

I think that people who pull off tricks to stay home and get paid, probably should stay home, just as a safety procedure for us that go to work.

If they are so mentally ill that they prefer to watch daytime TV instead of working, then they are seriously ill, or indeed, in need of a careeer change.