… Which is quite a shallow statement? Of course companies in France can fire people, they just need a good reason to do so. The proposal that was blown away said they didn’t need a reason.
The proof’s in the pudding: In most U.S. states, we have what’s called “at will” employment, which means that either employer or employee may terminate employment at any time with or without cause, yet unemployment in the U.S. is vastly lower than it is in France. -ian
Emmanuel Seyman
Unemployment is measured differently in both countries so I’m not sure how valid a comparaison this is.
Pierre
The problem is that in the US, people have to do several (up to 3 sometimes) jobs to earn a decent living.
The advantage in France is that you’re not at your boss’ mercy.
Therefore,you have a decent income ,and you don’t have to fear the future, hence a better quality of life.
I’m in no way saying that the American model is worse than the French (the French is threatened by its cost,due to universal health insurance and pensions).
As you’ve said,there’s a lower unemployment rate.
The problem with deregulation is that you can always say: I can find cheaper than you my dear,overseas or whatever,so unless you lower your expectations,i’ll have to give you vacancy.
That’s a vicious circle.The money will not go into the 3rd countries but into the people between them and you.They’ll get richer and richer.
I’m sounding perhaps a bit like a communist or a liberal (which btw hasn’t the same sense here as it is used as a synonym for capitalist/boss/leaders) but a recent study has shown that to provide mankind with a western way of life, you’d need six planets like earth…
Miguel
Ian, welcome to Europe. The land of liberals, unemployment, protected state-owned industries and the last monopolies.
1052
“[B]y not allowing bosses to harass attractive female workers, France essentially makes it impossible to hire them.”
W.a.B.o.B.S!!
HE
Libertarians sure love their empty, meaningless soundbites. The issue was not making it impossible to fire people. The issue was whether people under 26 should enjoy the same workers rights as older people.
Actually, the issue is that this sense of entitlement has created an economic system that is simply not sustainable.
Jéôme
Well, did you noticed that the french company called Mandriva did fire it’s co-founder Gael Duval recently ?
The way foreigners imagine life in a country is most of the time an information on their own fears and feelings ;-)
Also those pesky Europeans with their outdated primitive socialist safety net systems generally outlive the lean mean “modern” Americans.. maybe having less, but better jobs and a longer, healthier life is a worthwhile tradeoff?
see: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html
I strongly suspect that has more to do with the 40 ounce soft drinks and 3/4 pound bacon cheeseburgers. (Don’t even get me started about American culture. I’d love it if this country were more like Europe in many, maybe even most, respects. But economics sure as heck isn’t one of them.) -ian
Culture is part of it no doubt, but Australian food culture is not that far removed from US (steaks, chips, burgers, roast) , but the health system (and labor system until.. a few weeks ago?) are more European style and we clock in fairly high on that life expectancy scale. Of course there are heaps of other factors that could come into play here, but ditto for European employment rates.
You seem to think that American culture has nothing to do with its economical system. Well, that doesn’t make any sense.
Think about it this way. Who is more likely to feel the need of digesting unhealthy food in order to get a little bit of satisfaction out of it: the man who can live a happy life without constant fear of losing his job and having enough free time to do what he really loves; or the man who is forced to work all day just to keep his job, always in fear of losing it?
Who is more likely to spend most of his free time in front of the TV (and in the long run, becoming dumber and dumber), trying to get a little bit of distance from his daily life: the man whose daily life is relaxed and without fear; or the man whose daily life consists of two or three jobs that he has to work hard to prevent losing?
Who is more likely to be a good family father: the man who is protected from abuse by his employer; or the man who must do everything the employer wishes, however humiliating, always building up anger that has to be set free (probably at home, since he does not want to risk losing his job)?
Please think about it for a while. Thanks.
(I’m not claiming that Europe is heaven, by the way. We’re becoming more and more American now, with the EU and all, which I find horrible. But either way, equalling capitalism with »good« and socialism with »evil« is just as dumb as doing the opposite. Prove that either makes for a better *life* and I’ll take it over the other.)
Good reading, interesting article. Thank you for your time writing this blog.
By the way, is design for this blog made by you? I swear I saw the same design on G160 website a few months ago, but they seems to have different layout now. Don’t understand me wrong, I’m not blaming, I’m just interested.
Pu-lease, people! I lived in France for two years. Chomage was rampant. You cannot live and work there without recognizing that there is a problem. The more the state coddles people, the less incentive they have to work. There must be RISK to be REWARD. Period. End of story.
I think the facts of France’s economy speak for themselves. I have hired (and tried to fire – we had to offer two YEARS severance to management, and this was when my company at the time – Lineo – was struggling through layoffs. We could fire everyone in the company outside France – HAD TO, in fact, because we were about to go bankrupt – while our French office refused to make any sacrifices and demanded that we further bankrupt the company by paying out massive severances. We eventually went out of business and the French employees finally got the same thing the rest of us got: rien (nothing). Would I ever hire there again? Never.
So please don’t talk about how the law simply made it impossible to fire without a good reason – I’ve employed people there. It’s hard to fire anyone for any reason in France. As a result, most companies simply don’t hire there at all. Who needs the bother?
It’s nice to have safety nets. But I want people who are more concerned with upside than mitigating downside. You don’t build a successful company with the latter.
… Which is quite a shallow statement? Of course companies in France can fire people, they just need a good reason to do so. The proposal that was blown away said they didn’t need a reason.
The proof’s in the pudding: In most U.S. states, we have what’s called “at will” employment, which means that either employer or employee may terminate employment at any time with or without cause, yet unemployment in the U.S. is vastly lower than it is in France. -ian
Unemployment is measured differently in both countries so I’m not sure how valid a comparaison this is.
The problem is that in the US, people have to do several (up to 3 sometimes) jobs to earn a decent living.
The advantage in France is that you’re not at your boss’ mercy.
Therefore,you have a decent income ,and you don’t have to fear the future, hence a better quality of life.
I’m in no way saying that the American model is worse than the French (the French is threatened by its cost,due to universal health insurance and pensions).
As you’ve said,there’s a lower unemployment rate.
The problem with deregulation is that you can always say: I can find cheaper than you my dear,overseas or whatever,so unless you lower your expectations,i’ll have to give you vacancy.
That’s a vicious circle.The money will not go into the 3rd countries but into the people between them and you.They’ll get richer and richer.
I’m sounding perhaps a bit like a communist or a liberal (which btw hasn’t the same sense here as it is used as a synonym for capitalist/boss/leaders) but a recent study has shown that to provide mankind with a western way of life, you’d need six planets like earth…
Ian, welcome to Europe. The land of liberals, unemployment, protected state-owned industries and the last monopolies.
“[B]y not allowing bosses to harass attractive female workers, France essentially makes it impossible to hire them.”
W.a.B.o.B.S!!
Libertarians sure love their empty, meaningless soundbites. The issue was not making it impossible to fire people. The issue was whether people under 26 should enjoy the same workers rights as older people.
Actually, the issue is that this sense of entitlement has created an economic system that is simply not sustainable.
Well, did you noticed that the french company called Mandriva did fire it’s co-founder Gael Duval recently ?
The way foreigners imagine life in a country is most of the time an information on their own fears and feelings ;-)
Heheh.
Also those pesky Europeans with their outdated primitive socialist safety net systems generally outlive the lean mean “modern” Americans.. maybe having less, but better jobs and a longer, healthier life is a worthwhile tradeoff?
see:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html
I strongly suspect that has more to do with the 40 ounce soft drinks and 3/4 pound bacon cheeseburgers. (Don’t even get me started about American culture. I’d love it if this country were more like Europe in many, maybe even most, respects. But economics sure as heck isn’t one of them.) -ian
Culture is part of it no doubt, but Australian food culture is not that far removed from US (steaks, chips, burgers, roast) , but the health system (and labor system until.. a few weeks ago?) are more European style and we clock in fairly high on that life expectancy scale. Of course there are heaps of other factors that could come into play here, but ditto for European employment rates.
You seem to think that American culture has nothing to do with its economical system. Well, that doesn’t make any sense.
Think about it this way. Who is more likely to feel the need of digesting unhealthy food in order to get a little bit of satisfaction out of it: the man who can live a happy life without constant fear of losing his job and having enough free time to do what he really loves; or the man who is forced to work all day just to keep his job, always in fear of losing it?
Who is more likely to spend most of his free time in front of the TV (and in the long run, becoming dumber and dumber), trying to get a little bit of distance from his daily life: the man whose daily life is relaxed and without fear; or the man whose daily life consists of two or three jobs that he has to work hard to prevent losing?
Who is more likely to be a good family father: the man who is protected from abuse by his employer; or the man who must do everything the employer wishes, however humiliating, always building up anger that has to be set free (probably at home, since he does not want to risk losing his job)?
Please think about it for a while. Thanks.
(I’m not claiming that Europe is heaven, by the way. We’re becoming more and more American now, with the EU and all, which I find horrible. But either way, equalling capitalism with »good« and socialism with »evil« is just as dumb as doing the opposite. Prove that either makes for a better *life* and I’ll take it over the other.)
So, Americans are fat because they’re afraid of losing their jobs etc.? That’s a new one.
P.S. – You haven’t spent much time in the U.S., have you? Your view of life here is pretty warped.
-ian
Good reading, interesting article. Thank you for your time writing this blog.
By the way, is design for this blog made by you? I swear I saw the same design on G160 website a few months ago, but they seems to have different layout now. Don’t understand me wrong, I’m not blaming, I’m just interested.
Pu-lease, people! I lived in France for two years. Chomage was rampant. You cannot live and work there without recognizing that there is a problem. The more the state coddles people, the less incentive they have to work. There must be RISK to be REWARD. Period. End of story.
I think the facts of France’s economy speak for themselves. I have hired (and tried to fire – we had to offer two YEARS severance to management, and this was when my company at the time – Lineo – was struggling through layoffs. We could fire everyone in the company outside France – HAD TO, in fact, because we were about to go bankrupt – while our French office refused to make any sacrifices and demanded that we further bankrupt the company by paying out massive severances. We eventually went out of business and the French employees finally got the same thing the rest of us got: rien (nothing). Would I ever hire there again? Never.
So please don’t talk about how the law simply made it impossible to fire without a good reason – I’ve employed people there. It’s hard to fire anyone for any reason in France. As a result, most companies simply don’t hire there at all. Who needs the bother?
It’s nice to have safety nets. But I want people who are more concerned with upside than mitigating downside. You don’t build a successful company with the latter.