by Rick Lowe
The Employment Act amendments discussed here… and here… don't seem to amount to anything more than rank emotionalism.
It seems very little rational thought was put into the amendments regarding paid lunch hours, and consecutive hours off.
Is Government of the opinion that all employers and employees work in the same type of business and do not work shifts etc.
In other words, the responsible government official makes a decree , and because he says so, that's how it will be. Kinda like fitting a square peg in a round hole.
Yes, there are mean employers, but that is no reason to make a mean law that could marginalise the majority of employers. Let business flourish with reasonable policies so the economy can grow and new businesses come on stream. That way, those employees stuck with unreasonable employers will have another option for employment.
But no, it seems the only option is damn the torpedoes and let emotionalism reign.
Is rational thought an option with public policy making?
But the great F.A. Hayek pointed out in his essay "The Use of Knowledge in Society":
"If we can agree that the economic problem of society is mainly one of rapid adaptation to changes in the particular circumstances of time and place, it would seem to follow that the ultimate decisions must be left to the people who are familiar with these circumstances, who know directly of the relevant changes and of the resources immediately available to meet them. We cannot expect that this problem will be solved by first communicating all this knowledge to a central board which, after integrating all knowledge, issues its orders. We must solve it by some form of decentralization. But this answers only part of our problem. We need decentralization because only thus can we insure that the knowledge of the particular circumstances of time and place will be promptly used. But the "man on the spot" cannot decide solely on the basis of his limited but intimate knowledge of the facts of his immediate surroundings. There still remains the problem of communicating to him such further information as he needs to fit his decisions into the whole pattern of changes of the larger economic system."
"How much knowledge does he need to do so successfully? Which of the events which happen beyond the horizon of his immediate knowledge are of relevance to his immediate decision, and how much of them need he know?"
I wonder if the bureaucrats that devise legislation ever even think about this? Like I asked earlier, is rational thought an option with public policy making?
They have absolutely no idea what they are doing to business,nor do they care.Fidel Castro would be proud.Gibson needs to back off.He is also going to effect the employment rate in a negative way in the long run.Where does he get this from ? Does he not think we are being taxed far to much now ? This is a prime example of why Mr.Ingraham did what he did,at least he had his ministers reigned in and not speaking out of turn all the time like Gibson seems to be now.Its way past the time for members of parliament & ministers to be far more thoughtful of what they are doing to business in this country & stop this madness before there is no more business.I propose that all members of parliament & their ministers NO LONGER GET PAID because they do not know what the hell they are doing.
I wonder if they have even considered the amount this will add to the Government payroll?
Hi Rick, from a sunny (enjoy it while it lasts) London.
Thank you for pointing out this latest policy change. As I alluded to in my second Blog (on Unionised Activities), non-business friendly policies make us less attractive as a potential FDI destination. Therefore, any proposed legislative change to the Industrial or Employment Acts must be debated to prevent impulsive actions.
The new Administration must understand that even seemingly small ‘corrections’ to workplace legislation could mean the difference between a firm locating here and not! We are still faced with the same stark and simple question: to what extent do we want to be competitive to the rest of the global economic community?
I doubt that they have considered anything except trying to win more votes,that’s it Rick.Action speaks louder than words & their actions prove they do not care what they do to business at all in the Bahamas & both parties are guilty of it.They just keep raping business & it is stealing in my opinion.They discourage business when they should be encouraging business.They are supposed to be working for us the people & I wish there was a way for us to do the same to them.Lets cut their pay in half & take away all their benefits,no more spending.Make them pay their own way.Maybe then they will think before they act.
Employees win, employers loss.. A little Obamaism (Socialism) can destroy jobs in the Bahamas just as it has done in the United States.. Such labor policies are inflationary as they increase costs and these cost increases are passed on to consumers.. This eventually will destroy the Bahamian economy as the employees will be priced out of the market and will learn to do without.. Increased taxes, useless regulations and declining profit margins will only destroy the Bahamian private sector where productive job formation will NOT take place..
As the old folk song says, When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn”.. Sadly when it comes to government, the answer is NEVER.. Policies based on the social idealism of collectivism and not the economic realism of free markets always are doomed to failure..
I’m not sure this is a win/lose proposition Tradewinds.
I think employees might lose as much as employers and that’s a legitimate concern.
There are far too many people hurting as a result of the depressed economy here and abroad. To implement a policy that might force more employees out of work is far from rational public policy making.
Rick, perhaps my reference to win/lose was somewhat extreme, but I was only trying to drive home a point that most of our Labor Laws are designed to enhance so-called worker rights at the expense of increased productivity.. This is why we have no Call Centers in the Bahamas as they always end up in Asia or other countries in the Caribbean..
Several years ago, detail cost/benefit studies were performed for large American companies by Bahamian outsourcing companies, and despite the apparent advantages such as location and language, the Bahamas could not be competitive on a global scale.. High cost labor with poor labor productivity and restrictive labor laws were cited as the primary reasons why the Bahamas was not considered.. In the long-run these issues have cost our country probably hundreds of much needed jobs.. We have priced ourselves out of this growing market and we have lost an opportunity to further diversify the Bahamian economy.. What is even more painful is that one of the Companies that was considering the Bahamas chose one of our Caribbean neighbors as the base for its start-up call center.. Their win; the Bahamas loss..
ok, the best is the article/comments made by Obie Ferguson in the Tribune article “Employers Face No ‘Financial Situation’ From Act Reforms”. Really, can someone please teach him some basic math.
Wow, at a loss for words, but I will give it a try. So I have a 100 employees who all work 40 hours a week now, with an hour break (unpaid), cause it’s their time not mine. This gives me a total of 400 hours of productivity. Moving forward I have two choices neither of which cost nothing!!
How to keep 400 hours of productivity with no extra cost with the new paid hour lunch? Maybe Mr Ferguson uses a different type of math than the rest of us.
1. If I keep every one at 40 hours I will have to create an entire new schedule to keep my business open for the same hours since now they only work a straight 8 hours, including the paid lunch. Problem is I have lost 500 hours of productivity 100 people x 1 hour lunch (completely zero productivity for the business to run) equals 500 lost hours of productive work for the business to function. I had a total of (100 people x 40hrs =) 4000 hrs of productivity per week) before paid lunch hours. After paid lunch hours, I now have 3,500 hours of productivity, all for the same cost. So my cost have remained the same but with less productive hours, and I must now figure out some new creative schedule to keep my operational hours the same. At best I loose exactly 12.5% of my productive time, but still have the same workload for the company to function.
2. If I keep everyone at their original schedule plus the new paid lunch, I actually will now have to pay every employee for the extra hour worked, but at 1.5 overtime rates, which will equal a total of 750 hours at regular time added to my salary outlay each week. This equals roughly an 18.75% increase in my weekly salary outlay, for not one single hour of gained productivity.
Men like this seem to know what it will or won’t cost a business(country) to implement such ridiculous schemes, all without out actually running a business that has to absorb these cost. But unfortunately none of the cost will ever be born by the business, it as all other cost in doing business will be passed on to the customers, which in this case is everyone (the buying public). The union bosses and the politicians would be wise to look at Greece and learn from their bad ways. Slavery is well on its way back in our country but this time done by the economic masters that will control our country, as they hold the debt, and our elected officials will be powerless, much as the Greek politicians are today, to say anything other than yes “master”!
Socialism does not work, never has never will!
Ps: as a footnote. now that I have lost 12.5-18.75% in operating cost, it will be awhile until I think about hiring any new employees, and the public will see prices slowly increase to offset these costs! As they (the public) always pay for the extra cost of doing business, period!
At least you can increase prices Debt Freak, what about those businesses on price control?
I would stop selling them, and sell something else! If i could not, give notice to everyone, announce it loud and proud, sell it all, put my money in the bank, sit on the beach, drink a cool drink, no worries, no staff, no government, no stress, and probably make more profit!! It is getting seriously close to that point, where you could make just as much, without all the stress!
Some times I wonder why owners bother, when it seems to make sense to do just what you suggest.
Yes Rick I agree owners bothers too much and things have to be done significantly.