3 ms·

The premise of it being irreversible is wrong and far more complex. Case study. In my country, most individuals do benefit from a severance on a permanent cont

The premise of it being irreversible is wrong and far more complex. Case study. In my country, most individuals do benefit from a severance on a permanent contract. Getting a permanent contract happens after working for a year if you're lucky or in a high demand job. In other cases, companies will use their power to stall as long as possible where beneficial. Temporary contracts do not have the same severance benefits, just wait the year and they are gone. Severance itself varies case by case. Younger people with permanent contracts aren't getting multiple years in salaries for getting fired. Most older employees don't, either. The entire premise also requires a largely immobile workforce. Workforce mobility in The Netherlands is actually pretty decent, with most younger people switching jobs every few years. This inevitably means these people have temporary contracts for a large part of their career, with much weaker severance packages. Top comment also discounts the obvious, trying to get individuals to quit themselves through e.g. legal bullying or bad benefits.

ttoinou 4y ago
We shouldn't normalise pushing people to quit via bullying of course. But bullying and bad benefits result from a company/employee mismatch, which changing jobs fixes easily
- BlargMcLarg 4y ago
  And changing jobs means you now no longer have the vast amount of protection you used to and have to build them back up. For the majority of countries, your entire point rests on the premise individuals are choosing to largely be immobile. Tenure length isn't that different from the US, all things concerned. Significant, especially given some countries, but not nearly as dramatic as "impossible to fire". The moment you introduce mobility, most of the safety is gone for a large portion of time. What we are seeing, is that younger people are hit disproportionately since job hopping tends to be the far better choice, and younger people do not start at incomes that get them comfortable. It is primarily the elderly that benefit from the current structure.
  - ttoinou 4y ago
    And changing jobs means you now no longer have the vast amount of protection you used to and have to build them back up. ...unless you negotiate a better contract for the next job ? It is primarily the elderly that benefit from the current structure Agreed :-(
dnissley 4y ago
What do these permanent and temporary contracts stipulate? Presumably they are quite different than the standard US employment contracts that basically just confirm at-will employment, etc.
- BlargMcLarg 4y ago
  In NL, you generally start with a fixed term of a year. After the year, the contract ends. Depending on relationships, supply/demand, field of expertise etc., the employer will either offer another fixed term or a permanent contract. Permanent contract means the employer does not have the exit condition of "wait it out" to get rid of an employee. Additionally, permanent contracts tend to have bigger benefits attached to them, both legally and infrastructurally (e.g. getting a mortgage on a fixed term contract is nigh on impossible for most individuals). Legally, employers can only offer so many fixed term contracts before they are forced to hire permanently or cut off the employee. In practice, you will see more exploitative companies look for ways to extend this (alternative legal structures), whereas fields with more balance in power (like IT) tend to present permanent contracts after a single temporary contract.
  - mathverse 4y ago
    Oh yeah this is to prevent employers from keeping employees employed on a fixed term contract or through an agency indefinitely thus denying them some benefits and protection.

ttoinou 4y ago

We shouldn't normalise pushing people to quit via bullying of course. But bullying and bad benefits result from a company/employee mismatch, which changing jobs fixes easily

BlargMcLarg 4y ago
And changing jobs means you now no longer have the vast amount of protection you used to and have to build them back up. For the majority of countries, your entire point rests on the premise individuals are choosing to largely be immobile. Tenure length isn't that different from the US, all things concerned. Significant, especially given some countries, but not nearly as dramatic as "impossible to fire". The moment you introduce mobility, most of the safety is gone for a large portion of time. What we are seeing, is that younger people are hit disproportionately since job hopping tends to be the far better choice, and younger people do not start at incomes that get them comfortable. It is primarily the elderly that benefit from the current structure.
- ttoinou 4y ago
  And changing jobs means you now no longer have the vast amount of protection you used to and have to build them back up. ...unless you negotiate a better contract for the next job ? It is primarily the elderly that benefit from the current structure Agreed :-(

dnissley 4y ago

What do these permanent and temporary contracts stipulate? Presumably they are quite different than the standard US employment contracts that basically just confirm at-will employment, etc.

BlargMcLarg 4y ago
In NL, you generally start with a fixed term of a year. After the year, the contract ends. Depending on relationships, supply/demand, field of expertise etc., the employer will either offer another fixed term or a permanent contract. Permanent contract means the employer does not have the exit condition of "wait it out" to get rid of an employee. Additionally, permanent contracts tend to have bigger benefits attached to them, both legally and infrastructurally (e.g. getting a mortgage on a fixed term contract is nigh on impossible for most individuals). Legally, employers can only offer so many fixed term contracts before they are forced to hire permanently or cut off the employee. In practice, you will see more exploitative companies look for ways to extend this (alternative legal structures), whereas fields with more balance in power (like IT) tend to present permanent contracts after a single temporary contract.
- mathverse 4y ago
  Oh yeah this is to prevent employers from keeping employees employed on a fixed term contract or through an agency indefinitely thus denying them some benefits and protection.