Left/Right

Where do you sit?

  • Left

    Votes: 16 42.1%
  • Right

    Votes: 10 26.3%
  • Centre

    Votes: 9 23.7%
  • Other

    Votes: 3 7.9%

  • Total voters
    38
Status
Not open for further replies.
Flip it around McBain. In France you have a situation whereby it is incredibly difficult to sack people once they have a job, with the resulting situation that many companies do not/can not hire younger people because it's so hard to sack them if it doesn't work out. Many of those that are hired are hired on part-time contracts outside of the rules. It's a dangerous game to play to try and micromanage an economy as it assumes you are smart enough to have figured out such an incredibly complex system enough to not invoke unforeseen side effects.

We have a 3 month trial period for every job bar the high end stuff.

3 months is enough time to decide whether your going to hire someone don't you think? After 3 months if you haven't proved yourself you don't get the job.
 

Well latest research suggests that 46% of newly-hired employees will fail within 18 months, with just 19% achieving unequivocal success so it would seem not.

Taken from the Employers guide from the State Government.

Employee’s have access to personal provisions of the Employment Relations Act (2000) during trial periods. This means all the procedures of dismissal must be adhered to during trial periods.
The following describes the step by step process to conduct a 'three month' trial period. The purpose of this process is to minimise the risk of industrial challenge.
Key Issues

  1. Inform the employee his/her work progress is going to be monitored and if the performance doesn't meet the required standard his/her employment will be terminated. This is clearly stated in the 'Letter of Appointment'. Give the employee the 'Letter of Appointment'. Reinforce this verbally during orientation. Give the employee a copy of the review dates and what the review will entail.
  2. Inform the employee about the type of work he/she will be expected to complete and clearly state the minimum standards that must be met.
  3. Set a schedule for the 'three month' trial period. This will include performance review dates. Where an employee is advised his/her performance is below standard he/she must be given the opportunity, training and the tools, to improve. This must occur before the end of the trial period. Such advice is in effect a warning and is to be delivered verbally and in writing.
If the period selected is in fact three months, the following is an example of an acceptable schedule for reviews. It is organised to identify problem areas and provide the employee with sufficient time to improve before the trial period ends.
Step One
Day 1 Orientation: Take the employee through the job description and describe the standard expected. This will include production targets and quality. Also provide a clear description of the processes involved and checklists.
Step Two
Four weeks after initial starting date: Meet with the employee and review his/her performance. Discuss any areas of concern and be specific (alternatively tell him/her how well they're doing).
Tell the employee they have four weeks in which to improve and another review will be held then. Advise him/her that if there is no improvement you will be terminating his/her employment with notice of one week as per the employment contract. Give either the warning or their praise in writing.
It is a First Warning Letter. If the employee has reached the standard required encourage him/her to maintain the standards and inform him/her of the next review date in fours weeks.
Step Three
Eight weeks after initial starting date: Review work performance again. Revisit the orientation day and meeting one. Point out again the standards required and, if the performance is still not up to standard, try to ascertain where the employee is needing help. Be specific in what to do. Explain that the position is in jeopardy and that if there is no improvement by week eleven the employment will be terminated. Give the warning in writing. It is a Second Warning Letter. If he/she has met the performance standards required remind him/her of the need to maintain standards now and after the trial period. Remind him/her of the next review in three weeks.
Step Four
Eleven weeks into the trial: Review the work performance. If the employee has failed to meet the required standard he/she should be advised verbally and in writing (Termination Letter) that their employment is terminated with one week's notice. It may also say you can give one week's pay in lieu of notice. Please check your employment contract.
It's important to note that termination of employment is advised 'with notice'. If you don't give notice or provide the opportunity for improvement, and if adequate warnings aren't given as stated above within the trial period you have selected, you will be guilty of unjustified dismissal. It's also critical that all events are recorded in writing. If you can't prove the steps that took place, regardless of whether or not you took them, you are in great danger of settling 'out of court'.
The appropriate letters for Trial Period Meetings mirror those of Dismissal Procedures Templates.



I'd suggest that if you consistently employ people who 'fail' so frequently as the 'latest research' suggests your own position should be reassessed.
 

Oh without doubt the whole interview process for me is deeply flawed but it goes to show that there are deeper issues at play here. I mean it's dangerous to get into a mindset that says companies sack people for the heck of it or to hammer the little man. High staff turnover is very damaging to business, yet despite this seemingly obvious fact, the recruitment process of many, from advert through interview all the way to induction is pretty poor.

So it's good that the Australian government is trying to improve things, but I don't think legislating is a good instrument to use. In situations such as this government should advise rather than dictate. It's a slippery slope when you get down that road. I mean drink and smokes are obviously bad for you but would you want a government telling you what to eat?
 
We need to remember we are in different countries mate.

Would you Police it harder? Spend more money ratting out the cheaters? A Government can only make it harder to get welfare by upping the red tape, and there's always people who will cheat it.

The Labour Government here tries to stimulate the economy by initiating large scale school building projects; trying to get more people into work while the right tries to rob them of income and remove unfair dismissal laws.

Just seems like the right would fore go basic human rights to further line the pockets of the already wealthy.

That was a big cock up. I know people in the business who tried to tender for buildings and say the people who got the work charged over a million for demountable buildings, it was a huge waste of money and badly managed.
 
I went to a huge school in Sydney that was being built, it was the jewish community that were building it and was equipped with just about everything (think it was in dover heights).
 
That was a big cock up. I know people in the business who tried to tender for buildings and say the people who got the work charged over a million for demountable buildings, it was a huge waste of money and badly managed.

Was it? I'm doing the rounds around Sydney and I'm seeing loads of schools finally getting school halls. I didn't know that the construction industry was so honourable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top