NationStates Jolt Archive

As some of you may know, Australia has recently introduced a new set of workplace laws. Among those laws were changes to make it easier for employers to fire employees.

In theory, that might not even sound so bad...the problem comes when you introduce the human element, namely arsehole managers who think they need to "control the workforce", because apparently they can not get themselves to respect their workers as fellow men to trade with on equal terms.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,18879940-28477,00.html
Employee of 11 years, Vince Pascuzzi, says he was sacked for defending an employee who was fired for smirking at his boss during a staff meeting.

He said he had a mortgage and three young children, including five-year-old twins, and feared for his future.

"I had a lump in my stomach. (I was) shell-shocked," he said.

"I need my money, I've got a mortgage ... how am I going to get a job?"

Mr Pascuzzi said his termination notice cited a "disrespectful attitude towards management" as the reason for his dismissal.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/boss-denies-smirk-sacking/2006/04/21/1145344243451.html
A Melbourne company owner denies he sacked a worker for smirking, but says the new industrial relations laws have made it easier to "control the workforce".
...
Mr Sutton admitted he had taken issue with the facial expression of worker Harry Rai, 49, following a workplace meeting.

"I said: 'It's pointless having a smirk on your face, it means nothing now'," Mr Sutton said.

I'm sure NS General will have some fun with this topic, as always.

In the US, we have at-will employment and it doesn't have that kind of problem on a large scale; most of the time, employees leave on their own because someone offered a better job that they were qualified for. I think this will prove to be more of a small number of isolated incidents rather than a common practice.

It costs a hell of a lot of money to review, interview, and hire/train employees for a job, not to mention the costs incurred in terms of paperwork and logistics; the investment in a new employee might not pay off for a few months if the search was difficult enough.

Managers who fire people like that will likely soon find themselves out of a job because there's nothing that pisses their managers off more than wasting money or losing skilled employees. If they don't get punished for wanton firing, and that's part of their "corporate culture", then the comapny will probably be out of business because word spreads fast about that kind of asshole behavior.

Alright, so maybe long term it could be alright, but what about short term? People still need to eat, to pay off the mortgage, to work. Also, these new laws make it very easy for a persons wage to be greatly reduced.

It's funny. In the US we have "right to work" laws in certain stated, which really should just be translated as "fire away". Employers in these states don't need a reason to fire you, and if you are fired for no reason you still can't collect your unemployment insurance, because you were fired. I've had this kind of thing happen to me a lot, mostly when I was young and at menial labor type jobs that promised benefits after 3 months of employment. Guess when my "job performace was not up to par, and we are required to let you go"?