Unions plan “name and shame” campaign

The CTU is planning a “name and shame” campaign against employers that “exploit” workers under the new trial period law.

I don’t actually have a problem with this. Community reaction is one of the factors that is an influence on business decisions.

The vast majority of businesses will use the law responsibily. Many will not even ask for such trial periods in contracts, and generally there is no logicial incentive to dump a new employee if they are performing well. It costs money and time to recruit and train staff. The notion that there will be masses of employers sacking new workers on Day 89, just because they can, is ridicolous.

However there are some bad employers out there. They actually piss me off a lot, because it is the “bad” employers who lead to calls to regulate this and regulate that.

If an employer really does “exploit” a new employee, sacking them on whim, then unions have every right to highlight this.

But I would warn the unions to be careful about assuming all, or even most, dismissals during the 90 day period are “exploitive”.  That new sales rep may have proved unable to make any sales. That new cleaner may just be generating too many complaints from clients. Or that new staffer might just be an arsehole who is disrupting everyone else in the office.

In the end, what I am saying is each situation should be judged on the facts, not just given a pre-determined label.