90 day hiring law change: Should this be extended to bigger companies?
48%
258 votes
52%
274 votes
Comments (7)
»
Not unless it is an absolute requirement for the role (security, qualification etc). Too open to bias ('I didn't micro manage them"), personality ("They were not a good fit") or a raft of other excuses easily justified in hindsight! Shane - 1 Year ago
»
I think this may give Employers more inclination to hire people that before they may have thought twice about e.g. if they are unsure about our qualifications, experience then we have a chance to prove ourselves and we can see if we like them! Tessa - 1 Year ago
»
no this is making me dizzey
sam Jabbari - 1 Year ago
»
The worker does need to prove themselve's.
I work for My Employer's as I would expect them too work me, if I where paying them to work. - 1 Year ago
»
Employers should have to give a reason why the employee is not being kept on. The law was unneccesary in the first place as all that had ti be done was a clause put in the employment contract Mary - 1 Year ago
»
No - i think it should'nt. I'm worried that it could be used arbirtary - by employers. And if that happens, it could create uncertainty for new employees - of any age. There are employees who don't or won't measure up. But give them a chance, ya know - 1 Year ago