The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.
The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.
Dear Scrutiny Members,
I write with regard to the proposed changes to the new law regarding Paternity rights and wish to make general comment and feedback as follows:
- The law is extremely prejudiced against the employer and does not follow UK guidelines where the onus is on Government to pay the proposed 6 week benefit. Why are the States not proposing to fund this?
- I note the employer has no rights to determine when the tranches of paternity are to be taken but can completely be dictated to by the employee?...this is completely not equitable and unworkable!.
I could go on but feel other submissions have covered numerous other holes in the proposal which is extremely flawed. So let's look at the consequences if the law is brought in as it stands.
I employee 30 locally and have traded for almost 30 years. My staff are a priority they are the business. 8 have been with the company more than 20 years another 6 more than 15 years and a further 9 over 10 years. We are a proud local company that has a big commitment to social responsibility. We currently re invest 25k a year back into the local community with charitable support.
What will we do if this law is brought in its current form?
- As a specialised service industry we will need to bring in specific personnel from the UK reluctantly we will remove our social responsibility commitment to cover this with immediate effect. Basically sub-contracting.
- We are likely to freeze any future recruitment and will look at short term contracts only. Emphasis being on Zero hours.
- We will invest in mechanisation only and look to outsource outside of Jersey to fulfil requirements if forced to or it becomes necessary.
My observations to date are that small business has not been represented correctly in this process. Specific Forums or public meetings should have taken place to engage proper representation from Business and obtain both a practical and realistic appraisal of the issues that needed addressing before submitting the draft law. The very entities on whom this is being imposed needs far greater input into the process.
The majority of businesses like ours are not against improving our society but they must be fully consulted upon and not enforced upon. The current scenario has serious potential consequences for the employment of future generations especially in economic downturn. The proposed changes will have a detrimental effect to local employment and will cause underlying prejudice when recruiting.
If I can assist further in any future consultation process I am happy to do so. Yours Faithfully
Neil Faudemer
Managing Director Mailmate Print