Errrm⌠itâs a bit more nuanced than just slagging off labour tbf - itâs also a matter of public record to see no one has come out covered in glory if people want to look outside their political preference echo chambers - just sayinâ 
Some examples
I know there is a habit in govt to leak some ideas to gauge reaction, before presenting the legislation, but some of the stuff coming out on workers rights does worry me
Right to switch off - we can work with this providing there is provision for exceptions and the occasional business needs.
Compressed hours (doing 5 days work in 4 days) - not sure this should be the subject of legislation. I have an issue with this one size fits all approach to the work force. Businesses are different, even within the same sectors. Let us work out what to do. If it turns out we canât hire people because we donât offer compressed hours, guess what we are going to do?
Day 1 rights including unfair dismissal - how is probation going to work? Anyone who has been employed less than 2 years leading up to the day this goes live better be putting in a shift because all employers will be firing anyone they have the remotest doubts about. You also wonât take a punt on a new hire.
Definition of workers - are contractors going to get the same rights eg as above?
Right to switch off - absolutely fine with that and already encourage it - we have exceptions when something urgent needs to be done, but we make this clear at hiring stage.
Compressed hours - generally fine with it, but would want people to be grown up help out when it comes to all hands to the pumps situations and making sure we are delivering to client expectations. Weâre a 5 day a week firm and have v few on compressed hours.
Day 1 rights - am conflicted on this one
Definition of workers - we currently try to treat contractors exactly like permanent employees just with a cease date on their contacts- also making clear any benefits cease dates.
Its the governability of this when combined with flexible hours - we give people flexibiltiy in start and finish times, so they can decide day to day when they finish work. Does right to switch off mean i am in the shit because I tried to contact someone at 4.30 when they had clocked off at 4pm that particular day?
We could end up back at you all work 9-5 - no exceptions through fear of being sued
I donât think youâd be in the shit
Itâs more about being grown up about whatâs going on at work.
If you lay down the rules then there should be no issue with someone knocking off at 4pm & you should know not to bust a blood vessel because you wanted to talk to them at 4:30pm and theyâre not at your beck and call.
Is anyone going to die because of it? If no then speak to someone else or pick it up at 9am. If someone is genuinely going to die as a result then why are staff being allowed to clock off early?
Government drafts a law allowing use of common sense
Yeah.
They did tgat here.
Protect workers rights - safeguard old people make it illegal to sack anyone over 60.
Ergo. Nobody over 60 can get a job.
if they were done at 4 every day then that would work, its far more flexible. I dont know from one day to the next if an employee is going to work until 4. 5 or 6 - we gave them flexibility years ago to manage their day,
Governments never think through decisions to their obvious conclusions - I suspect when the dust settles on the private schools VAT thing, far more private schools kids will be in the state system than they anticipated and the only meaningful change will be to the house prices near the high performing state schools
The thing is workers rights are pretty decent in this country - there are some things that might need a tweak (fire and rehire), but broadly speaking its not a bad place to be an employee.
too much legislation and businesses are reticent to invest - we have looked at offices in Europe - the Netherlands was immediate scratched as soon as we realised the only way to dismiss someone was to get a court order even for gross misconduct. in the US, it affected the choice of state, you steered clear of Massachusetts and aimed at the âhire at willâ states.
If Labour overegg this particular omlette then I think they could end up doing more harm than good
I suspect that the flexibility you offer has been in place so long that they would be considered as contractual in a tribunal & if you tried to move back to a fixed work pattern then employees would have you by the short and curlies unless you did a proper consultation on changing things back.
The law of unintended consequences
What you need is someone living locally to start a movement to improve things⌠
Did I miss something and the Tories won the election? Freebies and tax dodging hedge fund funding?
It like old times.
Same shit, different colour t-shirt.
Nice to have a change from the last 14 years of shit though - at least letting someone else try and do better makes a change from the Tories.
Even Labour appear to have taken a page out of the Tory corruption song-book though.
Letâs look at the balance after the next 5 years rather than the last couple of months
Lets hope we donât get the worst of both worlds then
We probably will 
Your mistake was to imagine the election meant anything and that the cabal would change something when they pulled puppet strings
Ooh conspiracy theory alert
Anyone else think the grid lines are unnecessary?
Got to give the numb nuts a chance to think that one square doesnât contain cnuts.
Rayner was talking about further devolution for the North of England
Apparently ânortherners will no longer be dictated to by Whitehallâ - not sowing division then
So how is this going to work? Will the North of England get the same powers as Scotland and Wales? Or are we going to get another pointless political chamber that adds no value?
