NaBloPoMo Day 26 - When does unfair become fair?

On a day when British Prime Minister, David Cameron, should have is attention firmly squared upon the Eurozone crisis, a leaked report by Conservative donor, Adrian Beecroft, suggests that the government should repeal legislation that protects workers against unfair dismissal. The report, commissioned by David Cameron, suggests that employment law is holding back economic growth and that in order to encourage business, the laws should be scrapped. In the report, Beecroft says:

"Many regulations conceived in an era of full employment are designed to make employment more attractive to potential employees, That was addressing yesterday's problem. In today's era of a lack of jobs those regulations simply exacerbate the national problem of high unemployment." (Huffingtonpost.co.uk)

I fail to see how keeping someone in a job (whether they are lazy or otherwise) contributes to a problem of high unemployment.

Unemployment law in the UK is very detailed and sometimes complex, but if it is, that is because it has been honed to achieve the best balance between the employer and the employee. Having said that, the dismissal process is relatively straightforward, particularly for unproductive workers. How difficult is it to understand and implement a policy that is as simple as verbal warning, writing warning, final writing warning, out?

In my experience, all too often, unproductive workers are the result of the mismanagement of the employer. I have witnessed first hand an employee that literally sat with his feet up on the desk and got away with it over and over because the manager failed to follow the correct procedure for dismissal. Why did this happen? It wasn't because the law was ineffective, it was because the manager didn't want to deal with the problem and, when threatened by the employee (with an employment tribunal), didn't understand the process and the law enough to be confident to proceed.

While the employee must take responsibility for their own actions (or inaction),  the employer must take responsibility for addressing those problems. Individuals must be given a fair opportunity to reverse the negative behavior and improve their performance. Existing laws ensure that all employees receive due process when being dismissed and that they have a right of appeal. Even with laws as they are now, anyone can be sacked for any reason; it's just a matter of cost!

I have also witnessed first hand someone being summarily dismissed because the manager wanted to replace them with a friend, so it's not as if unfair dismissal doesn't still happen, even with the laws in place.


If there was ever any doubt that the Tories have changed for the better, this report removes it in one fell swoop. They are the party of the rich and the party of business and they have once again demonstrated how, despite a young, fresh image, and a selection of moderate policies, the party is the same old wolf wearing the same old sheep-skin rug and hoping no-one will notice. But we have noticed.

I understand the motivation and I even understand the principles on which Conservative policies are founded - small government, less tax etc. But the problem with small government (ie. repealing laws and removing government and civil justice responsibility) is that it is always the guy at the bottom of the ladder that suffers. After all, shit falls downwards.

Beecroft goes on to say in the report that:


"The downside of the proposal is that some people would be dismissed simply because their employer did not like them," and adds "While this is sad I believe it is a price worth paying for all the benefits that would result from change." (Huffingtonpost.co.uk)


The unjust sacking of even one hard-working individual is a price that I am simply unwilling to pay. Mainly because that person could, one-day, be me. We need more job security in a recession, not less and I'm pretty sure if Beecroft or David Cameron had normal jobs, this idea would never have been thought of, never mind actually making it to consideration. .

Serious Stuff....

Dear Messrs. Brown and Darling,

I just wanted to take a moment of my time to personally thank you for all your effort over the last twelve months. This year has been quite an accomplishment: One I would not have dared thought possible. Allow me to elaborate.

I am a sensible individual, pragmatic and careful how I spend. However, I admit that in my younger years I was lured by the golden fleece of credit and consequently saught to live beyond my means. Over the years I am sorry to say I built up a reasonable cushion of debt, which, when faced with tough times, I was unable to afford. It has taken me several years but a couple of years ago I became virtually debt free. Thanks to you, I now realise the error of my ways.

There I was, mistakenly thinking that the way to be secure and able to survive any crisis was to minimise my personal debt. But I am thankful to you for showing me the light. Of course I should spend every penny I earn, and more. If I want a new car, I should buy one. That expensive Radley handbag? Why not? A Gucci watch , PRADA sunglasses, and the two week long haul holiday to go with them? Definitely! It makes so much sense now - the way to survive a recession is to spend, spend, spend. We can always pay for it later, right?

So thank you for showing me the error of my ways. And also thank you for helping me to 'hit the ground running' with my renewed responsibilities by ensuring I have a £22,000 personal share in the national debt. You two are bloody geniuses!

Yours,
Kat Middleton
No-longer a Labour voter

Willy Wonka's Choco Recession Bites

This morning, while trying desperately to stay awake long enough to eat my crumpets and drink my coffee, Sky News did a piece on the Somerdale Cadburys Chocolate factory near Keynsham in the West Country. It seems that Cadburys are planning to close the factory by 2010, with the loss of 500 jobs in an area that is already struggling in the midst of the recession. Somerdale, and the Bournville factory in Birmingham, which is also set to close with a loss of a further 200 jobs, will be relocated to Poland. However, it seems that this move is part of a long term cost cutting exercise that began last year and is despite a strong performance in a difficult economic climate (in February this year, Reuters reported 2008 pretax profit of £559m with a projected growth in 2009 of around 4%).

This prompted me to wonder two things:

1) How realistic was portraying Willy Wonka as a local hero when he apparently sacked all his workers and hired Oompa-Loompan immigrants at half the salary? And

2) How many other companies were forcing redudancies and making sweeping cost cutting measures while hiding behind the economic downturn?

You may glance back over this blog to find a post concerning the closure of the First Choice Holidays call centre in Salford which certainly has an air of underhandedness about it. How much was their decision influenced by their long term plans, and how much by the recession? At least TUI Travel will be continuing to operate from the UK: I find it strange and troubling that a name with such a strong association with the British national identity should think it a good idea to move a sizeable chunk of their operation to Europe.

Food for thought indeed... or at least chocolate for thought.

A Licence to Print Money

Today, the Bank of England has made the decision to print more money.... because this tactic worked so well for Zimbabwe! The really troubling thing, however, is that it seems they don't actually print any more money. Instead the BoE presses a button and, by magic, the UK suddenly has £75 billion more than we had a moment ago. Can I have some, please?

It reminds me of something we were discussing at work recently. A colleague proposed that instead of pumping the billions into the banks who, lets be honest, have failed us all, we should rather give £1,000 to every UK citizen - man, woman and child. At a current UK population of nearly 61 million, that would only be £61 billion. Bargain! Especially when we consider that the banks have already cost us over £100 billion! Imagine having a grand gifted to you, right now. What would you do with it? Some people will spend it, blow it on a holiday or a shopping spree. Retail is saved! A family might pool it's cash and use it to put a deposit on a house, or to buy a new car. The housing market and manufacturing industries get a boost. Others will invest it in pensions, stock, or savings and the banks get money to lend to the rest of us. It's almost as magic as printing more money!

But seriously, regardless of the action taken thus far in the UK and abroad in the face of the recession, there is one thing that continues to bug me. Ultimately, the situation that we're in right now is because the culture and economy of the UK (and many other nations!) is built on credit. We're living in a throw-away society and we're groomed from an early age to get into debt. From the moment we enter college or university, we're offered student loans, personal loans and credit cards and the average student will leave a three year degree with over £17,000 of debt, even before they have a mortgage. As of the end of January this year, total UK personal debt stood at £1,457 billion (£1,225 billion in secured loans and £233 billion in consumer credit). When and where will this end? The government is desparately trying to get the banks lending again: why? So the UK population can get further into debt? I am by no means an expert in economics but I do know enough to realise that strong growth is not possible without an eventual correction - a crash. Therefore, it seems to me that we're standing on a precipice: we can choose to take a step back and put the breaks on spiralling personal (as well as national and commercial) debt, or we can do the opposite and run forward towards the edge at full speed.

Even if 'printing' more money works and eases the recession, I worry that all this action will amount to is the financial equivalent of plastering over cracks and hoping for the best.

Sucks to be Proven Right

It's at times like this that I really feel like a bit of a doom-sayer. I distinctly remember, on 9/11, standing in the TV lounge of a hotel in Tunisia saying that the twin towers were coming down. I'd seen enough movies and 'Seconds from Disasters' to know that the buildings, already compromised by the force of the impact of the two aircraft, we weakening by the second because of the intensity of the blaze. Aircraft fuel burns very hot and it was inevitable that this would eventually heat the buildings' metal sub-structures to the point that they could no longer support the weight of the floors above the blaze. Sometimes it sucks to be right.

A little over a year ago I left First Choice Holidays in Salford following the merger of the two package holiday giants, First Choice and Thomson. Like most people, I have bills to pay and even though my hubby works full time too, my salary is needed to supplement his income. I didn't want to be left in a position where I was made redundant with no job to go to, so I jumped long before I was pushed. When I chose to leave there were many people that questioned my decision: I'd been there over 5 years so was in line for a decent redundancy payout. In response, I distinctly remember saying that I was certain the call centre would close. Even after the company said that they were going to maintain the presence of a customer service department in this location, I was still sure that, ultimately, the office would close... maybe not in a few days or weeks or months, but in a matter of years, Salford would be robbed of a key employer. I had seen it happen before: In the 5 years that I worked for First Choice I saw the closure of the Kilmarnock call centre; I saw the closure of the closure of the call centre up near Teesside; and finally the closure of the airline customer service centre at Manchester Airport. Each closure brought more pressure and longer hours on my colleagues in Salford, and they continued to work with crappy pay and little complaint.

Many of the people that I worked with have already been made redundant. I know several that are still out of work and, although it's more luck than anything else, I am thankful every day that I didn't agree to hang on for the sake of a bit of cash. Choosing to leave means that I was able to pick and choose my employer and as a result I managed to get a really good job that is essentially 'recession proof'.

This time last year Tui Travel PLC made the decision to operate a customer service centre at the Salford site, making hundreds of local people redundant, but effectively securing the jobs of hundreds more. This week, Tui Travel PLC have announced that they are closing the First Choice Holidays call centre in Salford altogether, effectively pulling the rug from under those people who have stayed loyal to a company that has done them know favours. These people have been through a lot in the last 12 to 14 months and must've thought that they were safe.

I think the words of one First Choice employee on the Manchester Evening News website sums the situation up entirely:
x
"They put us through this last year, then announced in October that due to a business reshuffle they were closing down Coventry and creating a dedicated customer service centre in Salford, covering all aspects of holidays, weddings, cruise etc. Thinking our jobs were safe we all pulled together migrating all bookings on the old system onto the Thomson system. Now this has been completed they say that Manchester Ops are closing and everything is being relocated to Coventry. It stinks, they used and abused our loyalty, getting us to do a job nobody wanted to do or was not capable of doing down there. Some of the girls in CS [customer service] received 30 sacks of mail just before Christmas from Coventry, now that its done, we're surplus to requirements."

These are the people who look after you before and after your holiday. The bosses don't give a hoot once they've got your money, but the people who work in this call centre do care - otherwise they wouldn't do the job. TUI's actions are shameful.

How Much is a Billion?

Gratefully received from my Dad!

The next time you hear a politician use the word 'billion' in a casual manner, think about how much that actually might be... A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective:

• A billion seconds ago it was 1959.
• A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive.
• A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age.
• A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet.
• A billion pounds ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, at the rate our government [or local council!] is spending it.

Also, a billion years is how long it is likely to take to pay off the country's national debt!