Exempt employers with less than 10 employees from all labour laws

Exempt employers who employ less than 10 employees from all labour laws including laws relating to contracts of employment, job security, equality, wages, hours, collective labour laws, maternity pay, paternity pay, statutory sick pay, etc.

Why is this idea important?

Exempt employers who employ less than 10 employees from all labour laws including laws relating to contracts of employment, job security, equality, wages, hours, collective labour laws, maternity pay, paternity pay, statutory sick pay, etc.

Reform the National Minimum Wage to allow profit-share enterprises

Simply that the burden of paying the National Minimum Wage should be lifted from enterprises where the Employee or Worker has a share in any profits or gross earnings of that enterprise.

Why is this idea important?

Simply that the burden of paying the National Minimum Wage should be lifted from enterprises where the Employee or Worker has a share in any profits or gross earnings of that enterprise.

To ALL EMPLOYERS please give more 30 hour jobs!

My idea is to get employers to give more 30 hour posts  so that we can at LEAST claim working tax credit,  because you have to be working 30 hours or more to be eligible, which I think is strange, surely it should be the other way around, the less hours more help?

Why is this idea important?

My idea is to get employers to give more 30 hour posts  so that we can at LEAST claim working tax credit,  because you have to be working 30 hours or more to be eligible, which I think is strange, surely it should be the other way around, the less hours more help?

Housing, Benefits & Jobs

Having had the misfortune of being made redundant through ill health last November and also being made homeless for part of this year, I have had to hunt high and low for somewhere to live and it has been far from being easy!

The biggest problem with being unemployed, is the simple fact that a great many landlords do not accept DSS tenants. Look at most adverts for property that is available to rent and you will see the words NO DSS attached to the end of the advert. 

Having researched the problem myself, I have discovered that there is a serious level of discrimination towards those who are unfortunate enough to have lost their jobs through no fault of their own.

Your government may be looking to cut benefits in order to reduce the national debt, but for someone like myself who is desperate to get back in to work and also done their damned hardest to get off the street, benefits are vital until new employment can be found. By councils delaying benefits or constantly messing people around, they are adding even more stress to what is already a difficult time.

Yes, the benefits system needs a re-think and yes, there are people who abuse it, but there are a hell of a lot of people who need it, that are struggling to survive! 

I am on Job Seekers Allowance of £65 per week. £7.65 per week  is deducted from that because I had no choice except to apply for a Social Fund Loan in order to be able to get the house I am now living in. This leaves me with just over £57 a week to survive on. Once I pay for electric, gas and food, I am left with virtually nothing. I do not own a television and even if I did, I would not be able to afford a licence! I have no car, and yet again if I did, I could not afford to run it! 

What I am asking is that the government start to look at the reasons why the people on DSS are struggling to find employment…. is it because of a lack of jobs? A lack of skills? There could be any number of reasons. 

In my particular case, I was made redundant through ill health last year, since making a recovery, I have applied for over 180 jobs since March this year. Out of the 180 jobs I have applied for, I have had exactly 8 letters telling me I was not suitable for the position or was not qualified enough and I have been asked to one (1) interview! The rest I have not heard anything from! So as a part of looking at the reasons why people are struggling to find employment, look at the jobs which are being advertised! 

I have been registered with Jobs Today, Monster and several other websites. Since registering, I have checked them daily and all I see is a repeat of the same adverts by the same companies with very little difference elsewhere. Many of these companies when you read their adverts often talk about career prospects within the company and how you can advance through the ranks. If this is the case, how come so many of the companies advertising these claims of fabulous career prospects are advertising elsewhere…why are they not promoting their current staff to the managerial jobs which dominate the Jobs website pages and replacing the staff who are promoted?

Why is this idea important?

Having had the misfortune of being made redundant through ill health last November and also being made homeless for part of this year, I have had to hunt high and low for somewhere to live and it has been far from being easy!

The biggest problem with being unemployed, is the simple fact that a great many landlords do not accept DSS tenants. Look at most adverts for property that is available to rent and you will see the words NO DSS attached to the end of the advert. 

Having researched the problem myself, I have discovered that there is a serious level of discrimination towards those who are unfortunate enough to have lost their jobs through no fault of their own.

Your government may be looking to cut benefits in order to reduce the national debt, but for someone like myself who is desperate to get back in to work and also done their damned hardest to get off the street, benefits are vital until new employment can be found. By councils delaying benefits or constantly messing people around, they are adding even more stress to what is already a difficult time.

Yes, the benefits system needs a re-think and yes, there are people who abuse it, but there are a hell of a lot of people who need it, that are struggling to survive! 

I am on Job Seekers Allowance of £65 per week. £7.65 per week  is deducted from that because I had no choice except to apply for a Social Fund Loan in order to be able to get the house I am now living in. This leaves me with just over £57 a week to survive on. Once I pay for electric, gas and food, I am left with virtually nothing. I do not own a television and even if I did, I would not be able to afford a licence! I have no car, and yet again if I did, I could not afford to run it! 

What I am asking is that the government start to look at the reasons why the people on DSS are struggling to find employment…. is it because of a lack of jobs? A lack of skills? There could be any number of reasons. 

In my particular case, I was made redundant through ill health last year, since making a recovery, I have applied for over 180 jobs since March this year. Out of the 180 jobs I have applied for, I have had exactly 8 letters telling me I was not suitable for the position or was not qualified enough and I have been asked to one (1) interview! The rest I have not heard anything from! So as a part of looking at the reasons why people are struggling to find employment, look at the jobs which are being advertised! 

I have been registered with Jobs Today, Monster and several other websites. Since registering, I have checked them daily and all I see is a repeat of the same adverts by the same companies with very little difference elsewhere. Many of these companies when you read their adverts often talk about career prospects within the company and how you can advance through the ranks. If this is the case, how come so many of the companies advertising these claims of fabulous career prospects are advertising elsewhere…why are they not promoting their current staff to the managerial jobs which dominate the Jobs website pages and replacing the staff who are promoted?

Employment & The Over 50′ & 60’s

There should be a law that covers people over 50 and 60 who still want to work and are fit and able to do so, this law should state that:-  

"All persons that submit a CV or qualifications for a vacant position that match what has to be listed as the full experience quoted on the advertisement for that said position are to be interviewed, regardless of their age".

"A potential employer cannot under any circumstances decide that a person because of their age cannot be considered ".

And YES, this is the difficult bit because it's common knowledge that they WILL lie –

"If after an interview a person is not accepted for the position, a reason must be given which is much more than – "sorry not suitable or not enough experience", especially as the advertisement for the position clearly has to state what experience is required.

Why is this idea important?

There should be a law that covers people over 50 and 60 who still want to work and are fit and able to do so, this law should state that:-  

"All persons that submit a CV or qualifications for a vacant position that match what has to be listed as the full experience quoted on the advertisement for that said position are to be interviewed, regardless of their age".

"A potential employer cannot under any circumstances decide that a person because of their age cannot be considered ".

And YES, this is the difficult bit because it's common knowledge that they WILL lie –

"If after an interview a person is not accepted for the position, a reason must be given which is much more than – "sorry not suitable or not enough experience", especially as the advertisement for the position clearly has to state what experience is required.

Unfair rules restricting trade unions

The rules around trade unions taking industrial action are very restrictive. There are a great many procedural regulations that have to be complied with before industrial action can be taken, and there has been a spate of recent cases of employers getting court injunctions to prevent industrial action going ahead because of the union has made a minor mistake in following those procedures. (For example BA v Unite where the High Court has twice ruled strike ballots to be unlawful, although on the second occasion this was overturned by the Court of Appeal.)

I am fully in favour of a union having to get a majority vote in favour of industrial action, however there are so many procedural hurdles that have to be jumped over that it can be very difficult for a union to get everything right, and so the democratically expressed will of the members can be defeated in the courts by an employer's lawyers.

There should be a level playing field between employers and their employees/their unions.

Why is this idea important?

The rules around trade unions taking industrial action are very restrictive. There are a great many procedural regulations that have to be complied with before industrial action can be taken, and there has been a spate of recent cases of employers getting court injunctions to prevent industrial action going ahead because of the union has made a minor mistake in following those procedures. (For example BA v Unite where the High Court has twice ruled strike ballots to be unlawful, although on the second occasion this was overturned by the Court of Appeal.)

I am fully in favour of a union having to get a majority vote in favour of industrial action, however there are so many procedural hurdles that have to be jumped over that it can be very difficult for a union to get everything right, and so the democratically expressed will of the members can be defeated in the courts by an employer's lawyers.

There should be a level playing field between employers and their employees/their unions.