Just in case you thought the Tories were only targetting those on benefits...

[LeMarchand]

Workers are to be encouraged to sacrifice their employment rights in return for free shares in their company, George Osborne announced today.

In his speech to the Conservative Party conference the Chancellor said that employees could benefit from between £2,000 and £50,000 of shares in the business that they work for.

But in return they would have to give up their rights to unfair dismissal, redundancy and flexible working.

Mr Osborne’s aides said while the plan would be optional for existing workers – future employee could be forced to become “employee owners” as a condition of getting the job in the first place.

While the move is likely to appeal to business who have long lobbied the Government for more flexible employment laws it will infuriate the unions who will see it as part of slippery slope to eroding employment rights.

http://www.independen...-workers-8201795.html

So if you're out of work you're shafted, and if you manage to get a job (guess what?) - you're shafted!

[emmie]

so what happens if the business goes bust and then you are left with nothing.

[LeMarchand]

em10: If it's a big concern, the owners will skip off to found another business with the cash they have squirrelled away laughing all the way to the bank that they don't have to recompense their employees.

[Mick-Talbot]

you're shafted?

[craft1948]

Aren't all John Lewis employees shareholders, they seem pretty happy with the situation.

[emmie]

they are and i think they are, but what happens if they go into liquidation, not that i believe that will happen, or should it matter?

[Sqad]

If I can get this straight in my own mind...........

instead of the public sector "shafting " the government, the government is now "shafting" the public sector workers..............

Sounds fair to me.

[emmie]

but this isn't about the public sector surely, as no one who works for the public sector would get shares in it? or perhaps i have missed something. I assumed it was about private business only.

[Psybbo]

Does this mean the government will be giving us shares in them, we've paid enough.

[emmie]

we have shares in the banks don't we ?

[douglas9401]

They will not be happy till we're sending kids up chimneys and hanging sheep stealers again.

[Sqad]

douglas......no chance of that....the kids of the Welfare State are so fat, that you couldn't get them up the chimney.

[Psybbo]

Only if they're in trouble, em

[Thatcherite]

I'm a little bit torn on this one. I'm all for making it easier to get shot of useless employees but I do think that there should be a basic level of protection so forgive me if I sit on the fence for a while and see what others think.

[ichkeria]

Another ludicrous idea which I hope will be grounded. Although the worrying thing is it is a logical move from a govt which has seemed for some time hellbent on tearing up employment legislation. What about companies who already run such schemes? What if a company is doing poorly and its shares also? So you get made redundant with no rights as an employee and a pack of worthless shares?
This has a whiff of bribery about it and the reaction even from small businesses that I've heard seems less than favourable.

[pdq1]

So I assume if you join the scheme you tear up your union card. But what if your company is 100% unionised....not too difficult...many of the print unions insist on this. You will have 2 masters!

The scheme is obviously designed to take the power away from the unions. But many companies use union rates to decide your pay.

[VHG]

>Aren't all John Lewis employees shareholders, they seem pretty happy with the situation.

They are not shreholders because John Lewis does not issue shares.

John Lewis is owned by all its employees and they are called "stakeholders".

If John Lewis makes a profit then every year the employees share out some of the profits, which can be as high as 15% of their salary or more a year.

[jake-the-peg]

The problem with this is it's meant to be optional but it almost certainly wont be for new employees - it will be part of the job offer.

It's particularly an issue for women wanting a familly.

When my wife wanted to return to work after having our first child the MD (No less) wrote a letter saying "sorry we've given your job to someone else"


We sued his arse!

Under this we'd have had no rights at all

A real backwards step for women in the workplace I'd say!

[ichkeria]

... AND they still have rights under employment law :-)

[jake-the-peg]

PS

I might support it if it were limited to startups for a period of say 5 years

PPS

Government is "giving" No capital gains tax

Remind me what the allowance on that is again!!!

I smell a Tax avoidance scheme for the top brass

[LazyGun]

It sounds like a soundbite kite flying exercise to me, and a bad one at that. People should think long and hard before giving up hard-won employment rights.

Given Andrew Mitchells recent characterisations of police as "plebs", it is difficult not to conclude, with the kiting of this initiative, that the tory high command think that the majority of the electorate should be cowed worker drones, thankful for work at any price, whose pockets can be dipped into anytime the top 1% decide they need a little more relief from their onerous tax burden....