In recent years there has been talk of the need to introduce labor market flexibility.
Everyone talks about but few people know what they say.
Someone has left even the pens (see M. Biagi).
In the labor market, as in any market, there is a demand and supply: the employer and the employee.
If we talk about flexible market there should be a contribution by both parties.
The worker, on his own, his contribution has provided.
The contracts are not indefinite, we introduce the concept of the project, has less privileges (for the latter already what the speech starts to make water from the economic point of view but there you are ...) as less vacation days, few (none meglio. ..) paid leave and so on.
Well ... what is the contribution that the employer contributes to the flexibility of the labor market?
Response: None.
It 's so convenient to the employer to contact the "flexibility" that seeks to draw with both hands.
What is passed is simply the flexibility to reduce labor costs.
The entrepreneur has the ability to tap into the labor force cost (explicit and implicit) cheaper.
come to think of things should not be so but they should be diametrically opposed.
And I do not speak on the basis of personal opinion or political ideology but it is simple economic rules.
If I employed you free of constraint uncertainty, we leave and paid time ... well ... I give you these benefits because they pay me more?
Instead me pay less and so we get double.
defy me to renounce "this" flexibility.
In light of this on TV when I hear economists, journalists and political flexibility me goose bumps.
O do not know what they're talking about or pretend not to know.
0 comments:
Post a Comment