but even I think Osborne is an idiot today!

[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19865692Give up your rights, and get some free shares???[/url

lunacy!

The value of shares can go down as well as up

Note it says "up to £50000" (worth of free shares).

What is the betting that this will be the exception rather then the rule and what is the minimum amount employers can spend to remove these rights? And what about whether or not the workers can say no?

Unless the cost to employers is small those employing many workers such as supermarkets or the banks won't be able to afford it. Small companies won't be able to hand out £50K to numerous employees either. So for this to work in the way Osborne really wants - workers rights to be removed it must be feasible for employers to do this at much less than £50K.

If workers can be compelled to accept this idea then this is no different than a simple removal of workers rights as proposed earlier in the year.

Also what about new employees of a company. Will they have no rights by default? Will they be forces to accept (no doubt very few) shares on joining?

A number of questions there that I doubt crossed Gideon's mind when this was being "brain"stormed

It is another shoot from the hip idea that doesn't stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny when you think for less than a minute about the practicalities of it.

Why would anyone give up their employment rights for what amounts to two years of less than the national average wage?

Yep. Or do you just join a company, take the £50,000 shares then immediately sell them and leave?

You won't be able to do that. No one is going to employ you, give you £50K with no strings attached.

A little more digging reveals that the minimum amount an employer has to offer is a mere £2K. £2K for your rights!

This is nothing other than a scrapping of workers rights by the back door. Watch Ltd companies sell themselves to a new company and re-hire the entire staff forcing them to accept these terms!

What is more if they fire you they will be able to buy the shares back at a reasonable price (whatever that means) if you had not already sold them.

The scheme would also be compulsory for new employees of a company. So you will have no option to forgo your rights for a mere £2K if you move job or get one after being unemployed.

As I said this is the scrapping of workers rights by the back door.

It is , and they seem bent on scrapping workers' rights by any door available. I expect it'll be trapdoors soon.

[iIn his speech in Birmingham, the chancellor made clear he was not planning to change course and said [ua further £16bn of savings must be found by 2015/16 to meet his target of balancing the budget within five years[/u.[/i



An invoice for tax to Vodaphone, Topshop et al would be a start.

What happens to people who work for privately owned companies, co-operatives or in the public sector? Do they get to keep their rights?

Damned right.

A few pontificating about personal tax - and a Murdoch paper campaigning on dreadful personal tax 'avoiders' - but no mention from government or the [iTimes[/i about corporate tax.

Throw a few celebrities to the wolves - better yet if they have BBC links - but ignore the companies that are getting off by far, far more.

Tells you something, perhaps?

A thought which has crossed my mind as well. Private companies do issue shares but they aren't traded. They become worth something real if the company is either sold or takes a listing on the stock exchange. In the meantime they are worthless. So maybe the intention is such companies can give you £2K of worthless paper and still do away with your rights?

Another thing that crossed my mind is the fact this scheme will be free from CGT is a worthless sop unless you are given more than £10600 of shares. You are exempt from the first £10600 of capital gains in any one year so you would have to given more than this amount in shares [uand sell [/umore than that amount in any one year to incur any tax anyway.

My brother noted on Twitter that this has more holes than a string vest.

If it wasn't coming out the mouth of someone with so much power, we'd all be having a damn good laugh about it,

There's always the possibility that this is just intended for consumption at the conference - a bit of dead badger thrown to the party faithful - and that it'll quietly be allowed to disappear once he steps through the Stargate and returns to Earth.

Hopefully.

That seems to be the case, IDS has basically said that Osborne was spouting on most of the reforms and that none if it had, as much as I hate pretty much everything Labour I can't say as I think Osborne is the man to run the economy, problem is, I don't know who I would trust, certainly not the Lib Dems.

No idea who it was but someone has come up with the inspired twitter hachetag of: [url=https://twitter.com/i/#!/search/?q=%23Gidiot&src=hashGidiot[/url

I rather think the name may yet stick

Who'd give up their rights for a bit of paper?

[url=http://darrennewman.wordpress.com/2012/10/08/trading-rights-for-shares-the-latest-big-idea/Well, the press release makes it clear that companies will be able to [iforce[/i new employees to accept Gidiot's great plan.[/url

The BIS/Treasury presser says: "Owner-employee status will be optional for existing employees, but both established companies and new start-ups can choose to offer only this new type of contract for new hires."

And one of the right's you'll be able to give up (or be forced to) will be to request training. A trained workforce is such a drag on business, isn't it? Imagine workers wanting to be better trained! What do they want? To improve themselves?

Presumably the loan shark Beecroft is wetting his knickers at present.

Its a proven fact that trained employees are of absolutely no benefit to an employer. No sirree

I wonder how all of this waiving of employye's rights will sit with EU employment legislation? I always assumed that one of the basic tenets of the EU "market" was that no member country could try to obtain advantage by reducing basic employee rights. I could be wrong though

It is getting companies to implement what he wanted at £2000 a time (assuming the shares are actually worth that amount....).

Vince Cable and the Lib Dems were against it:

Writing in The Sun, Mr Cable said: "Some people think that if labour rights were stripped down to the most basic minimum, employers would start hiring and the economy would soar again.

"This is complete nonsense."

He added: "British workers are an asset, not just a cost for company bosses. That is why I am opposed to the ideological zealots who want to encourage British firms to fire at will."

But Mr Cable made his stance clear, adding: "Those who want to shake up the law need to realise that the days in the 70s and 80s when the unions ruled the roost have long since gone.

"I talk to businesses every day and none of them tell me that their biggest obstacle to employment and growth is troublesome workers who they can't get rid of."

From here: [urlhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9280473/Controversial-Beecroft-Report-on-employment-law-published-ahead-of-schedule-after-leak.html[/url

So have I missed Vince saying this bit of nutty legislation is not going to get past them either?

Quote ="Mintball"Presumably the loan shark Beecroft is wetting his knickers at present.'" Nah, he's busy at the moment... www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19887267

Quote ="Mintball"Presumably the loan shark Beecroft is wetting his knickers at present.'" Nah, he's busy at the moment... www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19887267