Parental Leave

#1
A nice little story from this morning's edition of Britain's favourite children's Comic in which Britain's scumbag politicians seek, yet again to claim political credit for something that no British Government would ever dream of placing before Parliament. The very thought of giving the plebs extra employment rights instead of proposals to work and tax them to death is anathema to the low-grade criminals masquarading as MPs these days.

Of course, allowing the the usual perception-altering 'drivel' normally published by editor of this particular comic in relation to the time; they forgot, or deliberately failed to mention the meeting of the Employment Ministers in December in which, despite the rhetoric, the social partners agreed to extend parental leave throughout the EU. The new provisions will be introduced by way of Directive to be implemented throughout the EU within the next two years!
 
#2
The very thought of giving the plebs extra employment rights instead of proposals to work and tax them to death is anathema to the low-grade criminals masquarading as MPs these days.
Why the **** would anyone need extra employment rights? It's already near-impossible to fire somebody, even if they're utterly useless with a shit attitude; and the laws regarding maternity leave make employing young women a risky business.

Small businesses are what keep the economy alive. We need to be supporting them, and doing everything we can to make it easy for them to operate; not taking away their staff for 10 months at a time to fulfil some fluffy happy families fantasy.
 
#3
Why the **** would anyone need extra employment rights? It's already near-impossible to fire somebody, even if they're utterly useless with a shit attitude; and the laws regarding maternity leave make employing young women a risky business.

Small businesses are what keep the economy alive. We need to be supporting them, and doing everything we can to make it easy for them to operate; not taking away their staff for 10 months at a time to fulfil some fluffy happy families fantasy.
To bring us into the 21st Century.
 
#4
Why the **** would anyone need extra employment rights? It's already near-impossible to fire somebody, even if they're utterly useless with a shit attitude; and the laws regarding maternity leave make employing young women a risky business.
To suggest that it is near-impossible to dispense with the services of someone with the characteristics you describe is risible in the extreme. It is rather easier than you might imagine. Indeed, the embargo for unfair dismissal after 12 months is likely in the near future to increase to 24 months. Employing young women in the workplace has always been a risky business at the best of times, particularly when employed alongside young men!

Employers have been bleating for years about "how difficult" it is to get rid of people and will never be satisfied until we return to days prior to the original Facories Acts of the 19th Century. As for employing women; employers want it both ways. They are happy to accept the benefit paying them less than men thirty years after the Equal Pay Act was introduced, hiding behind the confidentiality of salary levels while refusing to accept the burden inherent in the risk that they might become pregnant.

Most of our existing employent law comes from the European Union because our own Parliament long ago switched from representing the interests of those who were enfranchised to elect them and instead, chose to represent the interest of employers who are, today, the true constitutents of MPs which is why, unlike more mature democracies in Europe, the interests of ordinary people in the workplace will never be advanced by Parliament by way of legislation if it conflicts with the interests of employers, large and small who are in the habit of making large donations to political parties to get what they want!
 
#5
I echo DD,s post, this proposal is utter madness, I can see employers revising their small print within employee contracts,

Up to 10 months off is ridiculous...
 
#6
Why the **** would anyone need extra employment rights? It's already near-impossible to fire somebody, even if they're utterly useless with a shit attitude; and the laws regarding maternity leave make employing young women a risky business.

Small businesses are what keep the economy alive. We need to be supporting them, and doing everything we can to make it easy for them to operate; not taking away their staff for 10 months at a time to fulfil some fluffy happy families fantasy.

When my old man was shift manager at a local firm, he had an undeclared policy of not employing any women under 40 and no blokes under 25. His shift had the highest productivity and lowest absenteeism rates.
 
#7
To bring us into the 21st Century.
Rubbish! For the 15 years after I hung up my blue suit I was a contractor, no sick pay, no holiday pay, no guaranteed hours, start or finish a contract with no notice. Despite this supposedly draconian employment situation, I was able to stay fully employed and bring up two kids while many of the people I knew were whining off on the dole and complaining 'Thatcher took all our jobs'.
I actually quote liked the situation as the employers were in the same boat as you. They could get rid of you with no notice, but I could walk off site into a better contract with no notice as I did on a few occassions. It kept everyone on their toes and the companies were able to keep their better contractors fully employed while dumping anyone who was shite. Phoney Tonies 'improved' employment rights for contractors pretty much killed all that off.
 
#9
Why the **** would anyone need extra employment rights? It's already near-impossible to fire somebody, even if they're utterly useless with a shit attitude; and the laws regarding maternity leave make employing young women a risky business.

Small businesses are what keep the economy alive. We need to be supporting them, and doing everything we can to make it easy for them to operate; not taking away their staff for 10 months at a time to fulfil some fluffy happy families fantasy.
So, you're taking quite an open minded attitude to all of this then?
 
#10
And this proves what exactly?
Well, as you seem to be rather challenged in the deductive stakes, no women taking lots of time off with their kids - 'Chelsea's got a headache', no young blokes ringing in on monday because they had a thumping hangover. Two biggest absentee problems removed at a stroke.
 
#11
Well, as you seem to be rather challenged in the deductive stakes, no women taking lots of time off with their kids - 'Chelsea's got a headache', no young blokes ringing in on monday because they had a thumping hangover. Two biggest absentee problems removed at a stroke.
The only person who would appear to be deductively challenged here, is your Dad. And your ditty proves nothing, beyond the fact that you are most definitely a chip of the old block, you small minded ****.
 
#13
The only person who would appear to be deductively challenged here, is your Dad. And your ditty proves nothing, beyond the fact that you are most definitely a chip of the old block, you small minded ****.
Oh dear, I've been called a ****, how original!

Aw diddums, did the nasty man burst your fluffy bubble then - here, have a blanky and a weeks parental leave.
 
#14
For one thing it proves that his old man was incapable of managing and motivating young lads. I work with good lads who are often better than blokes in their 30`s and 40`s.
He wasn't interested in motivating them. His company was an employer of large numbers of unskilled labour, all that mattered was production quotas. Simple fact is/was, most of the absenteeism was in under 25 males and under 40 females. Stop employing them and his production quotas shot up as did his monthly bonus payments. Sound plan in my books.
 
#15
I see no downside for employers unless they have a policy of employing the young and pretty so that they can pay them sweetie money instead of a wage while they automatically dismiss employees for the venal fault of reaching middle age or worse, the age of 65 despite having years of productive worth left in them and wish to continue working.

Ageism in the workplaces is rife throughout the United Kingdom, employing older workers who have children who can look after themselves, or those whose children have left home and moved away may become a more desirable option for employers than has hitherto been the case.
 
#16
A nice little story from this morning's edition of Britain's favourite children's Comic in which Britain's scumbag politicians seek, yet again to claim political credit for something that no British Government would ever dream of placing before Parliament. The very thought of giving the plebs extra employment rights instead of proposals to work and tax them to death is anathema to the low-grade criminals masquarading as MPs these days.
Why should any company(and/or the taxpayer) have to pay because someone has chosen to have a kid?
 
#18
Because the alternative is to expect people to take responsibility for themselves. We can hardly expect people to save up or plan these things, can we?
Well, no, its much easier to live in a socialist paradise where other people should wipe your arse for you.
 
#19
I seem to remember having quite a few good young lads working for me - many seemed to have earned a row of medals before their 25th birthday. Wouldn't have wanted to give them 10 months off to baby-sit though.

Can't believe that a free country could have this forced on them - that would be loss of sovereignty or something wouldn't it?
 
#20
Why should any company(and/or the taxpayer) have to pay because someone has chosen to have a kid?
Why do we pay child benefit and tax benefits to those with children? Because those elected to run the country and through them, those that administer 27 member states of the EU are of the opinion that the break-up of the family has a serious socially detrimental effect on everyone. They believe that fathers and mothers who spend time with their children in the very early stages of life actually bond with them, are less likely to abandon them, or starve them of emotion and ultimately produce a well rounded and productive worker capable of filling a post in the workplace rather than prison or rehab.

Or perhaps someone thought that family life is something worth protecting and is just as important for the life of an individual as making a profit.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top