07.06.12
More criticism of no-fault dismissal idea
The Charted Institute of Personnel & Development (CIPD) has joined the ranks of those criticising proposals to reform employment legislation to allow ‘no-fault’ dismissal, labelling them “objectionable and unnecessary”.
In its response to the Government consultation on the issue, the CIPD says that ‘watering down’ employment law is not only damaging for employee relations but will also fail to achieve the intended result on its own terms.
Mike Emmott, employee relations adviser at CIPD, said: “We know that employers don’t spend all their time worrying about unfair dismissal claims. In fact, according to the Government’s own research, unfair dismissal doesn’t even figure in the list of top ten regulations discouraging them from recruiting staff.
“Adrian Beecroft’s proposal for a system of compensated no-fault dismissal is objectionable and unnecessary. It is objectionable because it would be a licence for bad practice in managing people and damage the reputation of the whole micro-business sector. It is unnecessary because employers facing a possible tribunal claim can already offer the employee a compromise agreement, and tailor the level of compensation to the particular circumstances.
“Countries that have excluded small businesses from unfair dismissal regulations such asGermany,AustraliaandSpainhave generally found it has failed to achieve the intended result. There is no evidence that no-fault dismissal would make a positive contribution to economic growth in theUKby encouraging the smallest firms to recruit more employees. Indeed, by increasing job insecurity and reducing employee engagement it would be more likely to damage growth.”
The CIPD’s full consultation response is at: www.cipd.co.uk/publicpolicy/consultation-responses/dismissal-compensated-no-fault.aspx
Tell us what you think – have your say below, or email us directly at [email protected]