Opinion: Unfair dismissal claims By The Lawyer 4 October 2011 10:44 17 December 2015 14:26 Sign in or register to continue reading. It's FREE Sign in Email Password Keep me logged in Forgot your password? Not registered? It's FREE! Register now Register with The Lawyer Ralph Musgrave 4 October 2011 at 14:36 Anya Palmer is quite right to say (last sentence) that “the impact on young people cannot be objectively justified”. By the same token there is not a shred of “objective justification” for any of our unfair dismissal legislation. It’s all based on politics, emotion and so on. The number of teachers who are dismissed, as I understand it, is around ONE PER YEAR in the entire UK. The idea that only 0.00001% of the members of a profession warrant dismissal per year is straight out of cloud cukoo land. Reply Link Anonymous 4 October 2011 at 17:19 I can say for certain that employers look up the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims before dismissing an employee (usually because it’s not working out and they want to replace them) because it’s the first thing I ask when I advise them. Is that objective enough? I think you have to look at the bigger picture. The EU is home to the most protective employment legislation in the world – and I don’t think the sclerosis in its labour markets is unrelated. If it’s easier to fire, it must be easier to hire; you don’t need proof or explanation, it’s self evident. Further, if an employer has the luxury of leaving it longer before making the call on whether to dismiss an employee, I can even envisage an inexperienced school leaver or graduate getting a better crack of the whip. One other thing – employees will have rights under contract (including the right to notice) and are protected under discrimination legislation, so it’s not as though unscrupulous employers can behave however they wish without fear of reprisal. So whilst it’s less good news for employment lawyers, in the current economic climate it makes sense. Reply Link Jonathan 4 October 2011 at 22:51 George Osborne appears to want to make it easier for Employers to treat their Workers as they were treated in this shameful episode http://tiny.cc/k7aep Reply Link Barry Mafia 5 October 2011 at 14:00 Anonymous at 5:19: “I can say for certain that employers look up the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims before dismissing an employee (usually because it’s not working out and they want to replace them) because it’s the first thing I ask when I advise them. Is that objective enough?” This is true for dismissing people, but the question asked in the article is whether the employers go through the same process when employing new staff, not dismissing existing ones. I also disagree that it is self-evident that “If it’s easier to fire, it must be easier to hire”. A year is long enough to work out whether someone is up to the job. It also doesn’t make sense for employers to hire and fire people within less than a year – the amount of productivity lost in getting a new employee up to speed will often not justify such an approach. Regularly hiring and firing within in a two-year period as a matter of practice may just work as a general policy, and only employees lose from this situation. Reply Link Anonymous 5 October 2011 at 16:19 This will make it easier to fire. And if the person you have hired is not up to the job and you want to fire them and get someone better in without being hounded through the Courts then surely this is a good thing for the productivity of the country? Reply Link Daily Mail Reader 6 October 2011 at 17:01 I would vote for 10% of workers across the UK being dismissed without any redress each year. It could be done through a random postal dismissal service. It would liven up receiving the post in the evening and also freshen up the market. Reply Link Anonymous 9 October 2011 at 12:36 You will find that this has come from lobbying to George Osborne from the Professional and Business Services Group, members of which include many senior partners of top law firms. If I were an employee claimant I certainly wouldn’t be using their firms! Reply Link Anonymous 30 July 2013 at 06:37 another government scam. This all relates to sub post masters and mistress who where unfairly dismissed, due to the faults in the post office Horizon computer system. If all post office owners, who were unfairly dismissed band together, and sue the Post Office, which I believe they are now in the process of doing, it will be a government scandal, they have allowed the Post Office Gestapo to get away with it for years. Threatening, putting people in prison, these people have lost their jobs, prospects, businesses houses and homes, not only some of them their freedom. All because they are always right, and could not believe there was a fault in the computer system. Power to the people. Lets hope all those in the post office who were victimized by these bullies, win their cases again the Post Office. We cannot believe what they have been allowed to get away with. Let no more the Post Office be a police state in its own right. Reply Link Name Email Cancel reply Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.