Last week, I read with utmost disgust and dismay on the Metro Newspaper, of a new supposedly ‘economy-boosting’ government initiative aiming to offer tax-free shares to workers in exchange for them to surrender their hard-earned employment rights, and l can’t help but wonder and ruminate on whether this is really some end-time desperate form of enclosures or just a regular habitual expropriation by our self-effacing government and their behind-the-scene capitalists and economic advisers.

Although, undoubtedly l had known  the crucial moments following  the global financial meltdown, that many capitalist economies, and even the so-called welfare states of Europe and America would struggle hard-line on the home front and tilt desperately to balancing their recovery postures in the face of the world economy in order to minimise impacts of public opinion, politics and to attract business investors, what l could not discern in time is the marked level of desperacy that would inform and follow, or at most influence the tone and direction of public policies, especially those directly impacting on the everyday livelihoods of  middle working class, and the millions  of people far-below the average poverty  mark.

Under this shambolic plan unveiled by George Osborne in UK, it is said that ‘Employees will receive as little as £2,000 if they agree not to sue their bosses if they are mistreated or sacked unfairly’ (Metro Newspapers, Tuesday October 9, 2012).

The damage would have been stopped at that, barring the already harsh economic situation and hard-felt welfare cuts. However,  the irony that followed the government backed policy, which critics are already saying was marred by ‘lack-of-consultation’ was one that workers, and most especially women, will also have to give longer notice to their employers if they intend to come back to work after parental leave; give up their rights for time-off for training; and lose their redundancy protections. You can imagine the scale of slap this would dealt Workers Unionists, who are hell-bent and had fought endlessly to protecting ‘powerless’ worker’s rights which took them several years and struggles to gain, when a case is been made for such pro-rich and capitalist agenda under the pretext that it would make businesses create a new generation of workers-owners.

For workers to own shares and become shared-owners of the companies they work for is not in itself, on the surface value, a harmful idea. What seem harmful about the idea is the suspicious manner at which the economic jugular of existing employees contracts are been strangled at their own expense, and the form in which new recruits will be compelled to sign up for the initiative or lose their job offer, just because the government think there is an incentive for offering employees a £50,000 capital-tax break, which in real terms will actually amount very little to them.

I am not saying the government does not own a right to its own policy-formulation and implementation functions, but must they go as far as deploring further attack on maternity provisions and protections against unfair dismissal? Besides that, it is common sense to know that, owning a few shares would perhaps be worth little to a worker who has already been sacked after giving up their right to claim for unfair dismissal or redundancy payment. So what the UK government is trying to achieve with this sinister policy is still, at most, very unclear, crude, ‘unthought-of’ and should be consigned to the recess of bad-politics, because it seem to me that actually that George Osborne and his economic team are just making another galvanising attempt to putting a price tag on the employment rights of well-able and hardworking UK working class.



  1. rukayat2012 Says:

    Well the role of Capitalism is to make sure that the masses keep working until they die. To ensure that a few elites make as much money as they want whilst the poor get poorer and poorer. The whole capitalist system in place needs to be extinguished. George Osborne, Andrew Lansley and the rest of them do not care about the state. They are there to facilitate privitatisation and extortion. Not surprising like most policies; they did not consult professionals before making plans.
    Like most policies women are hit hard on the issue. I hope no one signs up to this plan. Thank God it is not made compulsory. What happened to human rights?

  2. diwuoha1 Says:

    It just makes things difficult for the working population.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: