Do Employment Laws Protect the Employee or the Employer

[said]

The issue of Brexit affecting Employment Rights has arisen on numerous occasions. But just how much are employees protected?

The internet is full of disgruntled employees who appear to have genuine cases of harassment, wrongful accusations, discrimination etc., and the law is supposed to protect them. Many jobs today are on a contract basis of 6 months, 1 year, 18 months etc., but employees who are unfairly dismissed can only bring a case if they have been employed for two years or more. On many occasions, personnel in HR departments responsible for managing Disciplinary procedures have been shown to be completely inept - but because employees are put under great stress - it is a simple procedure to dismiss them.

There are many instances where an employee has suffered weeks of harassment and has been forced to submit a grievance to the company - there are as many incidences where those grievances have said to be acted upon with a decision 'No grounds for complaint' even though there is evidence to the contrary.

The EU is now considering bringing in even more legislation supposedly for workers protection - but there are growing protests that the most of the existing legislation exists to protect the employer.

[salus.populi]

Employment law appears to have offered you quite a lot of protection.

By the way - I sincerely believe that I hold a record. In my working career I have had fourteen disciplinaries! Can you believe that?

[seivad]

Employment law appears to have offered you quite a lot of protection.

Which is interesting considering that he's always been self employed. Of course it's always possible that he called himself into his office and gave himself a good talking to. Said's hair shirt?

Just out of interest have you ever been self employed ?

Yes, all the time!

[silver fox]

The issue of Brexit affecting Employment Rights has arisen on numerous occasions. But just how much are employees protected?

The internet is full of disgruntled employees who appear to have genuine cases of harassment, wrongful accusations, discrimination etc., and the law is supposed to protect them. Many jobs today are on a contract basis of 6 months, 1 year, 18 months etc., but employees who are unfairly dismissed can only bring a case if they have been employed for two years or more. On many occasions, personnel in HR departments responsible for managing Disciplinary procedures have been shown to be completely inept - but because employees are put under great stress - it is a simple procedure to dismiss them.

There are many instances where an employee has suffered weeks of harassment and has been forced to submit a grievance to the company - there are as many incidences where those grievances have said to be acted upon with a decision 'No grounds for complaint' even though there is evidence to the contrary.

The EU is now considering bringing in even more legislation supposedly for workers protection - but there are growing protests that the most of the existing legislation exists to protect the employer.

Now why do you think short term and zero hour contracts have become so prevalent? this is entirely due to employers using every trick in the book to circumvent existing employment law.

[local]

Which is interesting considering that he's always been self employed. Of course it's always possible that he called himself into his office and gave himself a good talking to. Said's hair shirt?

Glad to be of assistance.

[local]

Now why do you think short term and zero hour contracts have become so prevalent? this is entirely due to employers using every trick in the book to circumvent existing employment law.

I think you will find employment problems exist on both sides look at Said he's had to discipline himself 14 times.

[silver fox]

I think you will find employment problems exist on both sides look at Said he's had to discipline himself 14 times.

With so many disciplinary actions poor chap must have been fired on more than the odd occasion, think I've sussed it, Said the company fires Said the employee, Said emp gets the union rep involved who threatens legal action for unfair dismissal, Said co reinstates Said emp plus compensation (not usually taxable), Said co then claims for compensation money from insurance company, or alternatively writes the money off against profits.

Win, win all round, , I'll get me coat

[Desert Region]

With so many disciplinary actions poor chap must have been fired on more than the odd occasion, think I've sussed it, Said the company fires Said the employee, Said emp gets the union rep involved who threatens legal action for unfair dismissal, Said co reinstates Said emp plus compensation (not usually taxable), Said co then claims for compensation money from insurance company, or alternatively writes the money off against profits.

Win, win all round, , I'll get me coat

Wonderful! .

[Desert Region]

The issue of Brexit affecting Employment Rights has arisen on numerous occasions. But just how much are employees protected?

The internet is full of disgruntled employees who appear to have genuine cases of harassment, wrongful accusations, discrimination etc., and the law is supposed to protect them. Many jobs today are on a contract basis of 6 months, 1 year, 18 months etc., but employees who are unfairly dismissed can only bring a case if they have been employed for two years or more. On many occasions, personnel in HR departments responsible for managing Disciplinary procedures have been shown to be completely inept - but because employees are put under great stress - it is a simple procedure to dismiss them.

There are many instances where an employee has suffered weeks of harassment and has been forced to submit a grievance to the company - there are as many incidences where those grievances have said to be acted upon with a decision 'No grounds for complaint' even though there is evidence to the contrary.

The EU is now considering bringing in even more legislation supposedly for workers protection - but there are growing protests that the most of the existing legislation exists to protect the employer.

Perhaps without having realised it, you are arguing in favour of the influence and actions of the EU?

This is somewhat reminiscent of your posts regarding your dislike of the GDPR.

[salus.populi]

I think you will find employment problems exist on both sides look at Said he's had to discipline himself 14 times.

I
I've often thought that he would be partial to a bit of self abuse.

[gazaprop]

I might be wrong here but in the past certain unscrupulous employers got around having to allow paid holiday leave by employing several part time staff to cover one full time position.
Wasn't this addressed by legislation to compel employers to implement pro rata paid entitlement.?
If I have the principle correct then surely our employment law could be amended to cover short term contracts.
My own view is that they shouldn't be allowed and ministers hide behind the nonsensical claim that 'many workers enjoy the flexibility these contracts provide '.

[local]

With so many disciplinary actions poor chap must have been fired on more than the odd occasion, think I've sussed it, Said the company fires Said the employee, Said emp gets the union rep involved who threatens legal action for unfair dismissal, Said co reinstates Said emp plus compensation (not usually taxable), Said co then claims for compensation money from insurance company, or alternatively writes the money off against profits.

Win, win all round, , I'll get me coat

I have worked it out he works in the hall of mirrors...............

with the lights off.

[Little Londoner]

Ahh but hang on a minute if Said was a self employed bell ringer it is quite possible he tolled himself off on numerous occasions.

[said]

Which is interesting considering that he's always been self employed. Of course it's always possible that he called himself into his office and gave himself a good talking to. Said's hair shirt?

Ha!Ha! I have always been self employed! I may be paid a salary by a company, I do the work I am employed to do and I know what I am doing and I work well but I never take orders! The reasons I faced so many disciplinaries was generally where it involved me telling others to F.off, but on two occasions it was because I belted someone for really p..sing me off. The procedures scare the hell out of anyone faced with them the first time - but it never bothered me in the slightest - if they kept me waiting for any length of time, I just walked out the room and went on with my work. If they handed me a written warning, it went straight into the bin while they stood there watching. Hell - it brightened their day to be doing something different!

[gazaprop]

Ha!Ha! I have always been self employed! I may be paid a salary by a company, I do the work I am employed to do and I know what I am doing and I work well but I never take orders! The reasons I faced so many disciplinaries was generally where it involved me telling others to F.off, but on two occasions it was because I belted someone for really p..sing me off. The procedures scare the hell out of anyone faced with them the first time - but it never bothered me in the slightest - if they kept me waiting for any length of time, I just walked out the room and went on with my work. If they handed me a written warning, it went straight into the bin while they stood there watching. Hell - it brightened their day to be doing something different!

If you'd belted someone whilst working for me I'd have sacked you on the spot citing gross misconduct.
You could have gone through tribunals until you expired from old age and still not had a leg to stand on.