In Europe it's REALLY hard to hire new people. You have to 'vet' them to no end, and even then they can turn into a nightmare.
AFAIK: If someone works for you for (iirc) 6-8 weeks? They can go "on paid leave" for 3 months. You still have to pay them a full wage, but they don't have to work. Even after 3 months gone it's hard to fire them, they can still demand money for severance & such.
Some have said there's a lot of variance inside the EU. I thought it was some sort of 'universal rule' for EU nations, but I was mistaken 🙂
I had read 2 accounts (Greece and Belgium) that were very similar.
Seems like what a lot of the left wants. However it seems the only way that is sustainable is by abusing low cost immigrants and yet the left thinks they are virtuous.
In Sweden there is a 6 month trial period unless you manage to negotiate that down in your contract. During that period you can be given 3 weeks notice at any time without reason. These rules only apply to people working full time.
If you have a time limited contract with a company and you keep getting work there multiple times, then over a 5 year period if you have worked at that company for a total of 12 months your contract is converted to a full time contract. This does not apply to part time jobs, however part time can also be converted to full time if your employer always schedules you for on average 40 hours then it is deemed that you have been employed as part time maliciously and your contract is converted to a time limited which in turn can instantly be converted to full time using the rules above. There are quite a few cashiers with full time employments because the manager was sloppy or didn't want to employ more people.
The most common way employers try to make people quit who are protected by law is by claiming they need to cut down due to economics, if the company is actually doing equally well compared to last year they can be legally forced to give you your job back or pay you damages equalling 6-12 months of salary, depending on what the court decides. This may also be literally impossible for the company since firings should be made based on the "last in first out rule" meaning you can't fire that lazy boomer without paying massive penalties.
Giving them really shit tasks or clients to make the bad employee quit is another classic, which can be effective. Usually the employee has a mental breakdown and goes on sick leave for 2-6 months (paid by the state) and never comes back.
In Europe it's REALLY hard to hire new people. You have to 'vet' them to no end, and even then they can turn into a nightmare.
Eh, it varies country by country. It's very bad in countries like France, Spain and Italy. Go further north and it's not nearly as bad, though there's also not the more dynamic employment market America has. Nearly everyone here is happy with what we have, although they're not taking account of the costs that our system imposes, no more than you consider the costs of the American system: having no job security at all isn't a cakewalk either.
AFAIK: If someone works for you for (iirc) 6-8 weeks? They can go "on paid leave" for 3 months. You still have to pay them a full wage, but they don't have to work. Even after 3 months gone it's hard to fire them, they can still demand money for severance & such.
This may be true for one country or another (though I doubt even that). I can assure you that this is not universal though. There are places where employees can be fired in the first few months, no questions asked. You can also just not have your temporary contract renewed.
We have job security in America. When you get fired, the company pays for your unemployment through the government. They pay the state, and the state pays you, which is expensive.
Just because its easier to do, doesn't mean it doesn't cost anything to do it.
In Europe it's REALLY hard to hire new people. You have to 'vet' them to no end, and even then they can turn into a nightmare.
AFAIK: If someone works for you for (iirc) 6-8 weeks? They can go "on paid leave" for 3 months. You still have to pay them a full wage, but they don't have to work. Even after 3 months gone it's hard to fire them, they can still demand money for severance & such.
Someone that knows more than me should chime in. But I heard that in France to fire someone you basically need the employee to consent to being fired.
Some have said there's a lot of variance inside the EU. I thought it was some sort of 'universal rule' for EU nations, but I was mistaken 🙂
I had read 2 accounts (Greece and Belgium) that were very similar.
Seems like what a lot of the left wants. However it seems the only way that is sustainable is by abusing low cost immigrants and yet the left thinks they are virtuous.
In Sweden there is a 6 month trial period unless you manage to negotiate that down in your contract. During that period you can be given 3 weeks notice at any time without reason. These rules only apply to people working full time.
If you have a time limited contract with a company and you keep getting work there multiple times, then over a 5 year period if you have worked at that company for a total of 12 months your contract is converted to a full time contract. This does not apply to part time jobs, however part time can also be converted to full time if your employer always schedules you for on average 40 hours then it is deemed that you have been employed as part time maliciously and your contract is converted to a time limited which in turn can instantly be converted to full time using the rules above. There are quite a few cashiers with full time employments because the manager was sloppy or didn't want to employ more people.
The most common way employers try to make people quit who are protected by law is by claiming they need to cut down due to economics, if the company is actually doing equally well compared to last year they can be legally forced to give you your job back or pay you damages equalling 6-12 months of salary, depending on what the court decides. This may also be literally impossible for the company since firings should be made based on the "last in first out rule" meaning you can't fire that lazy boomer without paying massive penalties.
Giving them really shit tasks or clients to make the bad employee quit is another classic, which can be effective. Usually the employee has a mental breakdown and goes on sick leave for 2-6 months (paid by the state) and never comes back.
Eh, it varies country by country. It's very bad in countries like France, Spain and Italy. Go further north and it's not nearly as bad, though there's also not the more dynamic employment market America has. Nearly everyone here is happy with what we have, although they're not taking account of the costs that our system imposes, no more than you consider the costs of the American system: having no job security at all isn't a cakewalk either.
This may be true for one country or another (though I doubt even that). I can assure you that this is not universal though. There are places where employees can be fired in the first few months, no questions asked. You can also just not have your temporary contract renewed.
We have job security in America. When you get fired, the company pays for your unemployment through the government. They pay the state, and the state pays you, which is expensive.
Just because its easier to do, doesn't mean it doesn't cost anything to do it.
That's hopeful then. I'd heard about 2 examples (Greece and Belgium) that were very similar. Small business owners were stressed beyond belief.
In theory Canada has a 3 month "probationary period" but lawyers often get involved anyhow...
In Spain you can get rid of new hires for no reason within six months. It's like a trial run.
That may well be true, I just heard about 2 specific nations (Greece and Belgium) that were very similar. I figured it was some EU rules or something.