Let me say, for the removal of any doubt, that I’m neither right-wing, nor left-wing where politics is involved. Sure, I follow it, mainly because of the depressing mess we’ve been driven into here in the UK by a self-serving circus of a government ever since they found themselves in power in 2010.
No, I’d call my politics “common sense” – or, put another way, the belief in the bleedin’ obvious. A set of values and experiences which have been developed over a few decades of running small businesses through some quite often difficult times. So I thanked our lucky stars when we elected a new government, led by a results-focused “non-politician” in Keir Starmer.
My only doubt was that although he is, IMO, a committed, highly capable and decent man, as a non-politician, could he manage the politics of the job?
Well, they - and their teams - all flew into action as soon as they were elected, with an energy and common purpose that (almost) made me emotional. So good to see after the showboating we’ve been subjected to since, well, 1997 I’d say.
To lead is to serve, it’s said. Are you kidding? Government has become, to me, more like a rabble of publicity seekers and double dealers bent on personal career (and too often financial) advancement. Welcome to the trough ... let's hope it changes.
But with economic growth as its core objective, the weak point was always going to be just how much “doing-good” policies would get in the way. How much of an edge would be blunted by internal politics? How strong would Starmer be in managing the conflicts within his own party?
And I have a lot of respect for Starmer’s deputy Angela Rayner who has had a very tough life and risen to giddy office. Well done, I say.
But Angela, if I may speak to you directly, you’ve been employed as a care worker, and in the trade union movement, and worked really hard against oppressive odds that would have crushed most people. But have you ever had to run a small business? Or manage a team of people with data-driven performance targets? Likely not, so I would ask you, just for a few minutes, to put aside your crusade for the downtrodden workers (even though much of it is justified) and take a good look at the impact that the policies that you champion will have, at a time when our main priority must be to generate the funds to afford it.
What’s the Effect of “Doing-Good” Policies?
Well, like many people, I want a more equal society where the abuse of power, privilege and money are beaten down. Where people who are genuinely in trouble are supported ... and all that stuff.
But here’s the thing. You need to be careful how far you go when supporting people because there are those who will take advantage. Don’t throw up your hands in bleeding-heart horror: it happens. And the more people who get away with it, the more others will follow. It’s a slippery slope. With added polish.
Which means that if you’re not careful, you’ll be helping people who genuinely need support, but also others who don’t. And others who will actively game the system to their advantage.
And where the tab is picked up by the state, well, we all pay but the pain is spread. Big corporations will, in their self-important way, complain and bluster, because they always do. But they can handle it.
However, when it’s also borne by small businesses – each with their own unique situations and demands – you need to look closely at what the hell you’re doing.
Where’s the Engine of Growth In Any Economy?
Or let me put it another way. How many big corporations have the ability to grow organically by 50% in a year? Or 25%? Frankly, even if they did this (which they can’t) their infrastructure would fall to bits.
Forget the big boys: sure, they each employ large numbers of people, but they, relatively speaking, stand still. It’s the small and medium enterprizes (SMEs) that offer the growth potential in the economy. And when you look at
the numbers for the UK, they’re pretty startling:
- 9% of UK businesses are small or medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
- There are 5.5 million SMEs in the UK.
- SMEs contribute over half (53%) of private sector turnover in the UK.
- SMEs account for three-fifths (61%) of employment in the UK.
Now, I’m not saying that heading off to meetings of the G7 or glad-handing with the CEOs of international corporations isn’t important, because it is. And massively so. But what about smaller businesses? How will they be affected?
What Are the “Doing-Good” Policies?
I’m not objecting to banning exploitative zero-hours contracts (but please recognize that there are situations that actually suit both parties). I don’t want to allow “fire and re-hire” practices (though it needs clear definition if it’s going to work). Nor unfair discrimination or excessively low pay, They all sound sensible enough. Obviously.
I’ll just look at three that are being headlined as part of your plan to Make Work Pay, and each of them causes me to shudder. Because the knock-on effects are scary.
Introduce unfair dismissal rights from day one
This is, far and away, top of the list.
If this idea is left unchecked, I don’t know where it will end. It may sound great in a local meeting, on the picket line, or (of course) at Party Conference. You'll be cheered to the rafters. But how does it sound to a hard-pressed manager or business owner in a small company?
Have you ever interviewed someone who sounded plausible, and whose references checked out?
FYI, I’d always call their ex-employers and get an off-the-record view which was a hundred times more reliable than a bland written reference. The result was often surprising...
Anyway, then they’d start. And something doesn't feel right, Sometimes on day one, but often several weeks, or even months (I kid you not) into their time with you. It could be a hidden drugs problem. Often a personality clash; a laziness gene; a relationship breakup. Or even a previous, undeclared, nervous breakdown that flares up with crazy consequences. Yes, I’ve seen them (and many, many more).
The answer is to get a rock solid employment contract in place, and subscribe to a monthly advice helpline (who will make you want to scream with their safety-first advice). I’m no stranger to having to decide whether it’s a “performance issue” or a “disciplinary issue” when everyone knows it’s just an “attitude issue”. And the distraction factor is huge, especially when times are tough and you're stretched between hitting sales targets, servicing finance, getting the delivery right, trying out new marketing strategies ... I could go on, but you get the point I hope.
But of course, recently there has been a two-year period where unfair dismissal couldn’t be claimed. That was good, though it could be argued it was a bit overdone. It had previously been six months, and I can tell you, this was too short: a new starter would have their eyes set on the six month period – even talking loudly about it in the office – in which case any employer (that’s me in this case) would have to make an uncomfortable decision whether to keep, or fire, someone they weren’t sure of.
But now it’s said that there will be no protection for employers. Are you kidding? So every company will face the prospect of interviewing someone who chooses their words carefully so they don’t actually lie, they just don’t tell the whole story about their abilities, their experience, or their situation. And they’re in: through the door and protected. Three cheers for workers’ rights, eh?
Yes, there will be ways to solve these problems. But why create them in the first place?
You must know what will happen. Small businesses will, at best, be strangled by employment law legislation that distracts them from what they’re in business to do. Speculative claims will abound. Many business owners will put their plans for growth on hold. Or, even worse, just reach breaking point. Why not just fold the business and get a (protected) job working for someone else, without the hassle?
Employee rights from day one is just plain nuts.
Introduce rights to sick pay from day one
OK, so now how many people, aware that they’ll get paid, will “throw a sickie” if they feel like a day off? From experience, I’ll say that most won’t ... but many will. The hangover after a party, the cheesed-off feeling on a Monday morning, maybe even feeling cheesed of on a Friday ... I’ve heard them all, explained in an unconvincing wobbly voice, as “I must have eaten something.” Sure you did. And their colleagues look at you (or your manager) to see how you’d deal with it. Well, I’ve always said that I don’t want to pay people for not working, and the deterrent affect has worked on the whole. (Sure, I may have secretly alleviated the finances if there was genuine hardship, but that preserved the deterrent.) Now, protected in law, they’ll consider it “OK” and, ultimately a right, to take a few days of extra “sickie holiday”. Others will follow.
In a small business, who takes up the slack? Well, the (small) team will just have to cope. And in a small team, everyone is a key member. Your customer service unit may have six people, not sixty: now Jonny is out, who handles the overspill of calls, or processes the returns? And if Jonny is out for another day (or two??) what exactly is supposed to give? This is difficult when sickness is genuine, but what if everyone knows that Jonny was at a booze-up last night?
This policy sounds good to your supporters, many of whom are driven by ideology, not practicality. But in the real world, you’re making systemic abuse a reality.
Introduce rights to flexible working from day one
In the words of a tennis champion of years ago, “You cannot be serious!”
How many of us have called up a helpline and failed to get through? Or heard the TV in the background when the (clearly distracted) person at the other end of the line doesn’t seem to understand (or care much about) a simple message? Many of us ask how much of Netflix’s revenue comes from the WFH contingent (or as I call them, the WTF brigade)?
And how on earth do managers manage, and ideas get created, and team spirit get developed, when everyone is somewhere else? How does a business manager lead their team? People need the buzz of interaction to work at their best, and ignoring the value of a common workplace is to demonstrate a shocking failure to understand human nature.
Small businesses have their own culture, usually driven by the person in charge. It's their character, their vision and their methods that their people buy into. Sometimes it's a bit quirky, but it works: dare I say it can often be edgy and fun. Are you seriously considering a compulsory regime where everyone is wrapped up in tape - "red" tape is particularly apt here - that wrecks the whole ethos of a huge number of businesses? And even if you build in "safeguards" there are hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of businesses that will be fighting against cock-eyed demands that threaten to destroy them.
I'm not getting carried away here, believe me.
What about people who cannot work from home, like hospital or care workers in the NHS, or shop assistants, builders, plumbers, car mechanics (and so on...) If you want a “fair” society, what will you do about the resentment that will build, and the likely drift from these jobs into the WFH sector? (Yes, it will become a “sector”) I’d humbly suggest that the last thing we need is fewer NHS workers.
So What’s the Solution?
As I said at the start of this article, I was so very HAPPY that Labour won the election, for non-party reasons, and the size of the majority made me happier still. At last we could start to undo the damage done to our country by an Upper Class Twit, a Buttoned Up Loner, A Clown, a Space Cadet and (rather less so) a Spreadsheet In A Suit.
But hey, just a short while in office and doctrine is getting the better of commonsense. You may attract investment for big business projects; you may force through (unpopular) planning reforms to get houses and infrastructure built. But your insistence on crushing smaller businesses with wacko employment laws will simultaneously remove the oxygen from the real engine for economic growth. You need to think deeply, very deeply, about this, and take account of consequences you surely haven't thought through. After all, it's easier to shift you position a bit now, than to have to climb in and sort out a complete mess of your own making in a year or two.
I’m still a supporter. I want, passionately, for the new government to succeed, now and at the next election, so the job gets done properly.
But I’m very worried.
