It’s a while since I last blogged. Inspiration has been slow
to come, but this week, I have been following closely the comments and thoughts
around on Beecroft’s ideas for making in easier to hire and fire staff and
Employment Tribunal (ET) reform. You would think that as a practicing HR
Director whose role is quite ‘hands on’ a lot of the time, I would be over the
moon that it is now going to be more difficult for an employee to bring an ET
claim (and if Beecroft’s recommendations were implemented, even more so). My
job and that of my team could become easier! Even better, we are in the public
sector, where it is rarely possible to ‘pay someone off’ or compromise someone
out without jumping through a lot of Treasury hoops to show value for the
taxpayer! This means we have to follow process very carefully and closely
whenever we are dealing with ‘employee relations’ cases. Things can get
protracted…
But no, I am not filled with joy. Far from it. I tweeted
early last week that there is a difference between making it easier to ‘hire
and fire’ someone and making it easier to ‘fire’ someone. A number of people far more eminent
than me have already blogged or tweeted about this. My view comes from my day-to-day
work and that of the teams I have led over the last few years and also from my
observations of the culture and morale in various organisations.
Let’s start with hiring. Well, it’s not that difficult now
(thanks to the economic climate) for many entry or mid level roles, and this
has been the case for the last 3 years or so. Some delay and frustration comes
from the length of time certain pre employment checks can take, such as CRB,
but finding suitable staff is not otherwise hindered. How does easier firing
help here?
Now onto what happens during employment. This is the bit about organisational
culture and the competence of line managers (one of my hobby horses).
Notwithstanding the reams I could write about the critical nature of this, it
is not rocket science to understand that creating a climate of fear and a ‘gung
ho’ approach to dismissal is hardly going to motivate staff in a positive way!
High performance can be achieved when staff are worried for their jobs, but not
for a sustainable amount of time. Anyway, who wants their staff to perform just
to spite them, or just until something better or more enjoyable comes along?
Plus, if staff are easier to dispense with, what about high turnover and the
inevitable impact on service quality? How does easier firing help here?
More on what happens during employment. I am concerned about
the potential for situations where the employee and manager just don’t get on,
or worse, where a poor/ underperforming/ stressed/ bullying/ misguided/
discriminatory/ inexperienced manager could use relaxed employment rights to
dismiss staff too easily. See above about higher turnover and the effect on
quality. Secondly, there is the Equality Act to consider – defending an ET case
where there is a discrimination claim is not straightforward and losing could
be costly! Ultimately there could be reputational damage as an employer and
therefore as a provider of quality services. How does easier firing help here?
Finally, on to what happens when things aren’t going so well
during the employment. Yes, I am talking about disciplinary, grievance or
capability processes. This is where I really might be expected to get excited
about easier firing. But no, I remain convinced that tackling any issue early
and informally if possible and using simple, streamlined policies and
procedures has to be the best option. It safeguards against the potential for
dodgy line manager actions and gives a clear framework for all involved to
follow. Substituting this with making it easier to fire staff could have the
perverse result of destroying hard earned trust and co-operation with Trade
Union colleagues, who could find themselves having to resort to delaying
tactics, counter allegations or tenuous discrimination claims just to protect
their member. How does easier firing help here?
To conclude, what I am supporting can mean that HR
colleagues, management colleagues and I find ourselves gritting our teeth from
time to time, but this is a small price to pay for fair and transparent
processes that follow the principles of natural justice and protect the organisation.
