Tweet
A contract of employment is between two parties, yet they are rarely treated equally in standard forms of contract.
I have seen one which is close to ideal. A quaker employee contract. Surprisingly when I had previously asked about this issue I was dissuaded from highlighting it. I was fobbed off at a meeting also, with the excuse "too many moving parts". I was only given chance to hold a meeting about it because of an ally the hard core found I was associated with.
The worst case I have seen is a page of offences listed by a potential employer, followed by half a page of what that employer would do to the 'tiny little employee'. In contrast the 'grievance procedure' for the other way round problems was "you can speak to this person" and if not satisfied, then "THIS person" and so on.
It should be statutory that an employment contract if listing any offence of crime that an employee could possibly commit, should also be listed as a crime they themselves could commit. How many people are stolen from by employers? assaulted, raped, cheated in bad ways? Not listing offences still gives them the same rights to protect their business and is a lot more genuine.
The case stated above was really intimidating. Sometimes that backfires, and I was eager to take that employer to a tribunal. It sticks with people.
Can it be done? Replacing the current drafted contracts with strictly fair ones?
I have seen one which is close to ideal. A quaker employee contract. Surprisingly when I had previously asked about this issue I was dissuaded from highlighting it. I was fobbed off at a meeting also, with the excuse "too many moving parts". I was only given chance to hold a meeting about it because of an ally the hard core found I was associated with.
The worst case I have seen is a page of offences listed by a potential employer, followed by half a page of what that employer would do to the 'tiny little employee'. In contrast the 'grievance procedure' for the other way round problems was "you can speak to this person" and if not satisfied, then "THIS person" and so on.
It should be statutory that an employment contract if listing any offence of crime that an employee could possibly commit, should also be listed as a crime they themselves could commit. How many people are stolen from by employers? assaulted, raped, cheated in bad ways? Not listing offences still gives them the same rights to protect their business and is a lot more genuine.
The case stated above was really intimidating. Sometimes that backfires, and I was eager to take that employer to a tribunal. It sticks with people.
Can it be done? Replacing the current drafted contracts with strictly fair ones?