Cable rejects unfair dismissal proposals
The Business Secretary says there is "no evidence" to back up claims in Downing Street report leaked yesterday.
By Samira Shackle Published 27 October 2011 10:01
Vince Cable has rejected the suggestion, put forward by Adrian Beecroft, that unfair dismissal laws should be scrapped. As I blogged yesterday, a report by the venture capitalist commissioned by Downing Street claimed that the laws were hindering efficiency and growth by making it too difficult for employers to sack unproductive members of staff. It went so far as to say that this was the "first" problem facing British enterprise.
Asked about the proposals during a speech on growth at the Policy Exchange think-tank, Cable stressed that it was not an official report. He dismissed the central argument:
No evidence has been advanced that I have seen that it will improve labour market flexibility in general, or have any beneficial effect, but if anyone can produce any, we will look at it.
He also added that unemployment has not shot up due to a lack of flexibility in the labour market, and commended the flexibility of business and workers during the recession:
There was a great deal of flexibility shown by our employees as well as the employers. I go round a lot of our industrial plants. The unions have their formal positions, but it is very clear they are committed to their companies and are very flexible about working practices so the world has changed an awful lot in the last 30 years in a positive way.
According to aides, Cable and the Employment Minister, Ed Davey, are fighting to ensure that plans for growth do not end up with a narrow-focus on restrictive employment laws. However, George Osborne has already announced a range of measures which will make it easier to sack people. In the reforms that have gone through, people are only entitled to claim unfair dismissal when they have been working for at least two years. With further proposals expected on sick pay, it is urgent that this does not become an all-out assault on workers' rights at a time when employment is already so unstable.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Jobs
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists

















3 comments
He's right. The OECD study on this shows that "There appears to be little or no association between employment protection legislation strictness and overall unemployment" while economist Prof Stephen Nickell found that employment protection laws were "negligible and completely insignificant” as a cause of cross-country differences in unemployment in 1980s and early 90s.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/9/46/2079974.pdf
http://www2.gsu.edu/~ecobth/Nickell_1997.pdf
if prof stephen nickel is right, then why was sarkozy on the telly in France on thursday night practically committing political suicide with an election in 6 months, erm , berating french employment laws as being anti competitive and saying the French had no more firepower for EFSF!! and he KEPT saying that they'd have to become more austere, concerned on his credit rating, that they had to be like the Germans
Cable only objects to the unfair dismissal proposals because they are Vatable.
Post new comment