Britain, Business, Economic, Government, Legal, Politics, Society

Rights for workers. Reforms will be multi-phased

BRITAIN

BUSINESSES face years of uncertainty as a result of the Government’s phased introduction of major new workers’ rights.

A document published by the Department for Business and Trade admitted letting millions more staff sue their bosses from day one will create “concerns from business” and risks “unwelcome additional work for the tribunal system”.

But the “Next Steps” report also reveals that the landmark Employment Rights Bill is only the first stage of the shake-up, with many more reforms to be introduced later through secondary legislation or codes of practice.

The future burdens on firms include the “right to switch off” which will prevent managers from contacting staff out of office hours.

There will also be a review into the system of parental leave and the introduction of “socioeconomic duty”, which will force public sector bodies to consider the impact of policies on different classes in society, leading to fears the middle class will be squeezed out.

A proposed review of health and safety regulations could lead to staff getting the right to clock off if it gets too hot in their workplaces.

The DBT document says it will look at “how to modernise health and safety guidance with reference to extreme temperatures”. Unions have already called for a maximum of 30C (86F) indoors, or 27C for those doing strenuous work. Under a separate Equality (Race and Disability) Bill due later this year, firms employing more than 250 will have to report on the difference in pay between white and ethnic minority staff.

They will also have to show how they benefit the environment and communities when bidding for work, under plans to “ensure social value is mandatory in contract design”. Over the next few years, bosses will also have to follow the progress of legislation and contribute to public consultations if they want to raise concerns.

Experts within the field of employment law have expressed concerns. With multiple ongoing consultations for various reforms not yet included in this Bill, it remains to be seen if the numerous reforms will trickle into employment law over the course of months, if not years. That in turn may give rise to businesses struggling to keep up with the ever-changing legal position and risk ending up in hot water.

Now that the Employment Rights Bill has been introduced into Parliament, it’s clear what a daunting task employers will face. Much of the detail is still yet to come. Employers will have the opportunity to consult with the Government on the detail such as the length of probation periods, but that is vexed and problematic because they will have to wait longer until they are able to prepare for the detail of reforms yet to be published.  

Others believe that if the right balance is struck then we have the potential to get more people into work and boost economic growth. If the process is mishandled, however, there is a danger these things could have the opposite effect.

And there are concerns that these proposals will ultimately make it riskier and more costly for businesses to employ staff at a time when business confidence is at its lowest point in two years.

Standard
Britain, Business, Economic, Government, Legal, Politics, Society

Employment rights bill

BRITAIN

PRIOR to Labour coming into office, its general election manifesto said the government would introduce its workers’ rights package within its first 100 days. Yesterday, on day 97, it fulfilled that pledge. Parliament will debate the newly published employment rights bill in just over a week’s time. Even so, this is only one stage in a longer workplace reform journey that will take more than one parliamentary session to deal with. Many of the government’s decisions about changes to the world of work remain to be nailed down and are not part of the bill at all.

It has become easy to caricature the new legislation, and many are doing so. The Conservatives dismiss it all as rewards to Labour’s trade union paymasters. The Unite union says the plan is full of gaping holes. The Federation of Small Businesses says the plans are rushed and chaotic. But the British Chambers of Commerce says the government is listening and responsive. What isn’t in question, though, is the level of business fury. A leading legal publication says the package strikes positive notes with lawyers.

With views polarised, this is leading to a sterile, zero-sum debate on work issues. But the larger truth is that this is a bill about change. Employment law has not kept pace with developments in the worlds of work, family, and business. The stark reality is that a fresh approach, centred on the work issues of today and tomorrow rather than those of the past, is long overdue.

Unsurprisingly, then, the employment rights bill is multiple different things, not one simple ideal. The bill is large and wide-ranging. It comes in six discreet sections, containing 119 different clauses and runs to 158 pages. Most of it is about terms and conditions for individual employees, and the obligations that employers will have to follow. The bill also creates a Fair Work Agency to enforce it. Relatively little of it is actually about the law on trade unions at all, though you might not think so to listen to the political debate.

The most important rights in the bill belong to individual workers, and especially to new hires and to families. These include unfair dismissal protection from day one, along with day-one paternity and unpaid parental leave rights. Sick pay will apply from day one as well. Workers on zero-hours contracts will gain guaranteed hours if they want them. Fire and rehire on worse terms will be banned. Flexible working will be a default right.

The bill does not set all these rights in stone. A statutory probation period for new hires is still being discussed, during which greater flexibility would apply. Fire-and-rehire prohibitions may not be applied to businesses at risk of collapse. Small firms, some of which do not have HR departments to navigate these rules, are looking for a more adaptable approach too. It is better to get these issues right than to rush into them.

Some gaps remain. These include the right to switch off outside working hours, as well as a requirement for large employers to report on equalities pay gaps. Some unions want to roll back more of the restrictive legislation from the Conservative years. Nevertheless, the larger reality is that it is important that workforces should be well paid and treated fairly. This matters in terms of economic and employment justice, but also in making businesses more innovative and more productive. On this, at least, the Labour government’s approach is in line with the public mood – and rightly so.

Standard
Books, Business, Marketing

Book Review: (Business) The Catalyst

LITERARY REVIEW

Berger

The Catalyst concerns the art of persuasion

JONAH BERGER is a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania. His book is about changing people’s minds and he has advised large companies such as Apple and Nike. His approach is one of deftness and subtlety, one in which he doesn’t shout at anyone or by stamping on their toes.

The Catalyst is jam-packed with good ideas with very believable stories. It is perhaps written for those businessmen and women who often attend important business meetings.

When we try to change people’s minds – and we’re talking about everything here: politics, advertising, social attitudes, even the peanut butter you buy – we tend to think in terms of pushing and coercing. But as Berger demonstrates, people just hate being told what to do. “Tell them to vote one way and they’ll probably vote another way just to spite you.”

Berger recommends what he refers to as “reducing roadblocks”. Identify the obstacles and eliminate them.

The first of these he calls “reactance”. This is the anti-persuasion system that kicks in when we think someone is trying to talk us into something. “Encouraging people to persuade themselves”, says Berger. He tells an excellent story about a public health official in Florida who encouraged teenagers to give up smoking by getting the teens themselves to ask the awkward questions.

In one TV ad, they had a couple of teens ring up a magazine executive to ask him why he accepted tobacco advertising. The executive said he supported anti-tobacco ads, but when the teens asked him if he’d run the ads as a public service, he said no: “We’re in this business to make money.” The teens said, “Is this about people or about money?” The executive said, “publishing is about money,” and curtly hung up.

The TV ad worked. Within months, 30,000 teenagers in the state had stopped smoking. It was the most effective prevention programme ever, and it changed teen anti-smoking campaigns the world over.

Berger’s second obstacle is our attachment to the status quo. We like what we already have, and to make any change at all, the improvement must be worth all the fuss of doing it. Say your phone needs updating but you’re fond of your old one, even though it’s falling apart. The salesman’s job here is to highlight that simply not doing anything has costs you might not have spotted, and that change isn’t as hard as it looks.

Berger observes that if you have a product or service that is terrible, you’ll replace it instantly. But if it’s merely mediocre, you might stick with it because changing it is just too much bother.

Berger tells a rather fascinating and brilliant story about Dominic Cummings when he was heading up the Vote Leave (Brexit) campaign. He needed a campaign slogan, and initially he came up with “Take Control”. Which was all right, but he knew that referenda usually fail because people are happy with the status quo. He had to make it seem that leaving was the status quo, not remaining. Which he did by inserting the word “back”: “Take Back Control”. Berger says: “It made it seem like something had been lost, and that leaving the EU was a way to regain that.”

Next up is “Distance”, which I think should be interpreted as how far some people might be from the viewpoint you’d like them to have.

Say that the person you’re speaking to is a Trump supporter and climate change denier, and you want to convince him that transgender rights are a good idea. That’s distance, all right. Berger recommends taking small steps rather than large ones. Ask them to move a little way towards your goal, then ask them to move a bit further.

Berger’s book is full of goodness, but sometimes he’s so opaque you begin to wonder whether English is actually his first language. But that may just be because it’s written for people who use words like “reactance” in everyday conversation.

 – The Catalyst by Jonah Berger is published by Simon & Schuster, 288pp

Standard