Employment Law Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Baroness Meacher

Main Page: Baroness Meacher (Crossbench - Life peer)
Monday 21st May 2012

(12 years, 6 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord De Mauley Portrait Lord De Mauley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I am aware of a considerable amount of research. I bow to the noble Lord’s greater knowledge of the academic research, of course. The Government are absolutely committed to flexibility for employers and employees. We have consulted and continue to consult widely on a number of issues and, as I have said before, we will not take action unless it is on the basis of evidence.

Baroness Meacher Portrait Baroness Meacher
- Hansard - -

Will the Minister explain to the House how the no-fault dismissal idea is compatible with the Government’s declared commitment to well-being? Will the Minister agree that job insecurity and unemployment are the greatest threats to mental well-being, and also that high morale in the workplace is the best assurance of high productivity and therefore growth? Will the Minister agree that any unsuitable member of staff can in fact be moved on by good supervision and management? Will he therefore assure the House that this Government will encourage good supervision and management, rather than heartless employers?

Lord De Mauley Portrait Lord De Mauley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am sympathetic to what the noble Baroness says. As I have said, we are keeping an open mind on this issue of no-fault dismissal. It is a fact that the smallest businesses are less likely to have access to human resources and legal advice and are therefore less likely to feel confident in applying procedures. I think that is one of the key issues. We want to examine whether a no-fault dismissal system for microbusinesses would be helpful in dealing with this, particularly in increasing their confidence in employing people.