Give firms freedom to sack unproductive workers, leaked Downing Street report advises
Companies should be given the right to dismiss unproductive workers without explanation, a leaked Downing Street report advises.
Give firms freedom to sack unproductive workers, leaked Downing Street report advises
Under current regulations, workers are allowed to 'coast along', the report says Photo: ALAMY

By Christopher Hope, and Robert Winnett

10:00PM BST 25 Oct 2011

Comments351 Comments

Britain’s “terrible” employment laws are undermining economic growth and should be overhauled, according to the confidential report obtained by The Daily Telegraph (Published below).

It says that British workers should be banned from claiming unfair dismissal so that firms and public sector bodies can find more capable replacements.

Under current regulations, workers are allowed to “coast along” and employers are left fearful of expanding because new staff may prove “unknown quantities” who are impossible to sack, the report says.

The radical recommendation to scrap the concept of unfair dismissal is made by Adrian Beecroft, a venture capitalist, in a report commissioned by David Cameron.

The report is understood to have the support of both the Chancellor and Downing St, although the proposals are likely to meet with strong opposition from some Liberal Democrats and trade unions.
Related Articles

Report: dismissal law stifles growth
26 Oct 2011

Clegg targets tax system and state inspectors
25 Oct 2011

Ken Clarke risks fresh row with Theresa May
25 Oct 2011

Older and underperforming workers face sack
25 Oct 2011

While Downing Street is aware that the proposal will be controversial, it is equally concerned that the scale of the economic crisis is such that dramatic measures are required to promote growth.

A final draft of the Beecroft report, dated Oct 12 2011, says the first major issue for British enterprise is “the terrible impact of the current unfair dismissal rules on the efficiency and hence competitiveness of our businesses, and on the effectiveness and cost of our public services.”

The report continues: “The rules both make it difficult to prove that someone deserves to be dismissed, and demand a process for doing so which is so lengthy and complex that it is hard to implement.

This makes it too easy for employees to claim they have been unfairly treated and to gain significant compensation.”

Mr Beecroft in particular highlights abuses of the law in the public sector, where managers have been forced to offer under-performing staff large settlements because they fear costly tribunal rulings. The report says that the unfair dismissal rules have made public bodies “reluctant to dismiss unsatisfactory employees”. “[They] therefore accept inefficiency that they would not tolerate if dismissal of unsatisfactory employees was easier.”

It goes on: “A proportion of employees, secure in the knowledge that their employer will be reluctant to dismiss them, work at a level well below their true capacity; they coast along.”

The recommendation is particularly aimed at helping lift the burden of red tape from small and medium-sized businesses, which lack the human resources departments and expertise to deal with complex tribunals.

The report concludes that there is nothing in European law that would prevent the Government from abandoning unfair dismissal laws – although regulations preventing dismissal on the basis of a person’s gender, race or sexuality would remain.

However, Mr Beecroft warns that simply scrapping the law would be “politically unacceptable”.

He therefore recommends a replacement regulation, called Compensated No Fault Dismissal, which would allow employers to sack unproductive staff with basic redundancy pay and notice. Mr Beecroft concedes that a “downside” under his new scheme is that employers could fire staff because they “did not like them”.

“While this is sad I believe it is a price worth paying for all the benefits that would result from the change”, he says.

The confidential report has been circulated across Whitehall this week and its findings are understood to have been discussed with business leaders, who are said to support the key recommendation.

Downing Street was not planning to release the analysis but is now expected to publish the report later this year, partly to counter inaccurate reports that suggested the report advocated cutting maternity rights.

Mr Beecroft insists that making it easier for firms to sack under-performing staff will boost employment, rather than increase unemployment.

He says: “In the long run it will increase employment by making our businesses more competitive and hence more likely to grow.

I've always worked on the premis that if someone isn't working out for you then sack them anyway, worry about the tribunal later. It's far more damaging to the business to have that sort of behaviour in your business.

It won't happen as we have come too far from the 17th/18th century though i suspect the Tories would love it ..hope the unions don't rise to this one.

There are ways for getting shut of under performers but albeit slightly longer than F2F 's way

It will not happen, I am all for sacking lazy workers and there are systems in place to do just that, it has to be said there are time scales in place to get rid of workers who don't come up to scratch, any managers who find their workers are lazy after that have not done their homework.
Protection of workers was brought in because of unscrupulous owners who sacked workers on a whim when it was beneficial to them to do so, any change to the law will not be about lazy workers but to give owners carte blanch to run a horse and cart through the present legislation.
Workers need protection from unscrupulous bosses always have always will!