4 ms·

"as long as healthcare is tied to employment" makes it barely radical at all.

bdangubic 10mo ago
so you have guaranteed employment for life with the same company? that is about as radical as it gets. this would shoot the unemployment through the roof if I, as a business owner, am unable to fire anyone that I hire! health insurance or not, that is to radical for even the most "social" country in existence (or that previously existed)
- seba_dos1 10mo ago
  If you're looking for reading comprehension lessons, I don't provide such services.
  - bdangubic 10mo ago
    ugh that is too bad, Sundays are always good for learning new things
- alexgieg 10mo ago
  You're uninformed. France has that, and it doesn't result in excessive unemployment; in fact, the unemployment rates in France and in the US are practically the same, respectively 7.5% vs. 7.8%. What changes between the countries is the hiring procedure. US and UK companies mostly use a "hire anyone, keep the slightly useful ones for as long as they seem slightly useful, fire everyone else, fire them too, wash, rinse, repeat" narcissistic-sociopathic trial-and-error pseudo-method that's just guesswork dressed up as "choice". French companies, and those in countries with similar preferences, take their time to very seriously vet the people they're hiring with a focus on the long term, and do it right from the start, following scientific hiring methodologies that leave little to no space for guesswork and gut feelings. The result for the company is the same: the proper employee, at the proper position, doing the proper job the company needs. The result for the employee is that the first "method", being as it is narcissistic-sociopathic, promotes unnecessary human suffering with zero actual benefit to anyone, whereas the second promotes well-being, satisfaction, and good work-life balance. And, again, unemployment rates don't vary between them. Now, if you believe your company would do badly under this system, maybe it would indeed. Which only goes to show you don't know how to hire properly. Start hiring better, and it'd make zero difference for you whether you're in a system or the other. In fact, start hiring better, and you may even move ahead compared to your narcissistic-sociopathic competitors, since then they will be the ones going with simple trial-and-error, while you will get the right employees from the start, and without regrets.
  - bdangubic 10mo ago
    under what law/statute/etc... in France is forbidden to fire an employee? a link to this law for my education would be greatly appreciated...
    - shagie 10mo ago
      This gets into "my French is rusty... and legal French is non-existent". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_(employment)_in_France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_(employment)_in_Fran... https://www.rippling.com/blog/termination-in-france https://www.rippling.com/blog/termination-in-france In particular the parts: > French laws don’t recognize at-will employment. In France, you can’t simply dismiss an employee without reason. In fact, the French labor code makes it extremely clear that it considers termination to be an absolute last resort, especially in cases of voluntary or involuntary personal grounds for dismissal. Instead, it encourages employers to try to find other ways to resolve the problem. For example, let’s say the employee in question is having serious interpersonal issues with their manager or a coworker. You can only dismiss them after you’ve tried everything else, such as holding a meeting in which you talk to the two of them and try to find a solution, or by putting them on different projects so they don’t have to work together directly. If the company is putting technological changes in place to increase its competitiveness, before you can start the dismissal procedure, you must demonstrate you tried another course of action, such as redeployment or employee training. > Everything must be documented. This is extremely important: You must document evidence of all events and/or incidents that led to the dismissal of the employee, even if the reasons have nothing to do with their conduct specifically. You’ll use this evidence both during the interview when you’re telling the employee why they’re being dismissed and should also keep it in case the employee decides to bring a lawsuit against your company. --- If someone is having difficulty with their job, you first provide them training before you can fire them. From what I understand, it has to be a "we tried everything for the past year, here's all the documentation and they're still unable to do the basic requirements for the position.
      - bdangubic 10mo ago
        > companies shouldn't be allowed to fire someone except for actual negligence / malice France sure does a lot of things right here but above is what OP stated that I commented on which isn't the case for France. While one might have to go through some additional paperwork / procedures / ... you can in fact fire an say an underperforming employee

so you have guaranteed employment for life with the same company? that is about as radical as it gets. this would shoot the unemployment through the roof if I, as a business owner, am unable to fire anyone that I hire! health insurance or not, that is to radical for even the most "social" country in existence (or that previously existed)

seba_dos1 10mo ago
If you're looking for reading comprehension lessons, I don't provide such services.
- bdangubic 10mo ago
  ugh that is too bad, Sundays are always good for learning new things
alexgieg 10mo ago
You're uninformed. France has that, and it doesn't result in excessive unemployment; in fact, the unemployment rates in France and in the US are practically the same, respectively 7.5% vs. 7.8%. What changes between the countries is the hiring procedure. US and UK companies mostly use a "hire anyone, keep the slightly useful ones for as long as they seem slightly useful, fire everyone else, fire them too, wash, rinse, repeat" narcissistic-sociopathic trial-and-error pseudo-method that's just guesswork dressed up as "choice". French companies, and those in countries with similar preferences, take their time to very seriously vet the people they're hiring with a focus on the long term, and do it right from the start, following scientific hiring methodologies that leave little to no space for guesswork and gut feelings. The result for the company is the same: the proper employee, at the proper position, doing the proper job the company needs. The result for the employee is that the first "method", being as it is narcissistic-sociopathic, promotes unnecessary human suffering with zero actual benefit to anyone, whereas the second promotes well-being, satisfaction, and good work-life balance. And, again, unemployment rates don't vary between them. Now, if you believe your company would do badly under this system, maybe it would indeed. Which only goes to show you don't know how to hire properly. Start hiring better, and it'd make zero difference for you whether you're in a system or the other. In fact, start hiring better, and you may even move ahead compared to your narcissistic-sociopathic competitors, since then they will be the ones going with simple trial-and-error, while you will get the right employees from the start, and without regrets.
- bdangubic 10mo ago
  under what law/statute/etc... in France is forbidden to fire an employee? a link to this law for my education would be greatly appreciated...
  - shagie 10mo ago
    This gets into "my French is rusty... and legal French is non-existent". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_(employment)_in_France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_(employment)_in_Fran... https://www.rippling.com/blog/termination-in-france https://www.rippling.com/blog/termination-in-france In particular the parts: > French laws don’t recognize at-will employment. In France, you can’t simply dismiss an employee without reason. In fact, the French labor code makes it extremely clear that it considers termination to be an absolute last resort, especially in cases of voluntary or involuntary personal grounds for dismissal. Instead, it encourages employers to try to find other ways to resolve the problem. For example, let’s say the employee in question is having serious interpersonal issues with their manager or a coworker. You can only dismiss them after you’ve tried everything else, such as holding a meeting in which you talk to the two of them and try to find a solution, or by putting them on different projects so they don’t have to work together directly. If the company is putting technological changes in place to increase its competitiveness, before you can start the dismissal procedure, you must demonstrate you tried another course of action, such as redeployment or employee training. > Everything must be documented. This is extremely important: You must document evidence of all events and/or incidents that led to the dismissal of the employee, even if the reasons have nothing to do with their conduct specifically. You’ll use this evidence both during the interview when you’re telling the employee why they’re being dismissed and should also keep it in case the employee decides to bring a lawsuit against your company. --- If someone is having difficulty with their job, you first provide them training before you can fire them. From what I understand, it has to be a "we tried everything for the past year, here's all the documentation and they're still unable to do the basic requirements for the position.
    - bdangubic 10mo ago
      > companies shouldn't be allowed to fire someone except for actual negligence / malice France sure does a lot of things right here but above is what OP stated that I commented on which isn't the case for France. While one might have to go through some additional paperwork / procedures / ... you can in fact fire an say an underperforming employee