←back to thread

1041 points mertbio | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
acatton ◴[] No.42839715[source]
> The Myth of Job Security in Germany

> [...] If a company decides to lay off, for instance, 40 employees, German law doesn’t prevent this. Instead, the law enforces a social scoring system to determine who is affected, prioritizing the protection of the most vulnerable employees, such as those with children. In this sense, when it comes to layoffs, the difference between Germany and the US is minimal.

This is not true, and an over simplification.

Yes, you can always technically layoff in Germany, but it might not hold in court. Most people have legal insurance (mine is ~€300/y) which is tax deductible if it has employment protection. Mine will cover costs for an employment-related lawsuit.

If you feel that your layoff is not justified, you can always sue, the judge could decide that your work contract was unlawfully cancelled, leading to the company having to re-hire you and paying your salary for every month it didn't do so. The company posting record profits could weight in your favor in front of a judge. People, especially non-native like me, don't know better, they just move-on and go c'est la vie. If you sue, win and get re-hired, you can always ask to leave for a bigger package.

For companies above a certain amount of employee (50? 75?), if a small amount of employees (I think it's 3 or 4) request it, the company must run a works council election. For any layoff (individual or mass layoff), the work council must be consulted, and has co-determination, they can basically block the layoff, this was done by Volkswagen's work council recently. [1] For large mass layoffs, companies might also have to consult with the authorities.

Last thing, the social scoring is much more complicated than "those with children." If you have 4 kids and got hired 7 months ago, you might be fired, and I, single person, might keep my job with my 15 years of tenure. Tenure, disabilities, children, ... a lot of things take part into the social scoring.

All and all, I agree with a lot of the sentiments and points of the article. But saying that, outside of social scoring, layoffs between the US and Germany are the same is simply not true. There is a reasonable job security in Germany.

[1] https://www.volkswagen-group.com/en/press-releases/agreement...

replies(4): >>42839813 #>>42839865 #>>42840039 #>>42841219 #
twixfel ◴[] No.42839865[source]
I understood the claim to be that if you are at the bottom of the social points scale then you are sufficiently vulnerable for it not to matter. That the people who really benefit from Germany's strong labour laws are those with kids, disabled people, old, etc... but not just a standard young person.

Germany is just a strange country IMO. Lots of "nice" stuff like this that sounds great but really only works for the older generation and doesn't really work for young people, who are already hugely disadvantage by the German boomerocracy (probably one of the worst boomerocracys in the world).

replies(3): >>42840326 #>>42840368 #>>42841673 #
acatton ◴[] No.42840368[source]
I'm not a lawyer, but AFAIK, age doesn't influence your social score, tenure does. If I'm a 30 year old with 10 years in the company, I will have a better score than 50-year-old you who got hired 7 months ago.

The idea is that working at a company "squeezes juice out of you", so you should not be so easily fired after a long tenure, because the company got all the rewards from your juice, but you don't have much left. You can agree or disagree, but I have to admit that there is a logic.

replies(1): >>42840553 #
1. twixfel ◴[] No.42840553{3}[source]
I understood the logic to be instead that older people nearing retirement find it much harder to get new jobs.

And I agree there is logic to all of these things we are discussing. The problem is rather that everything is falling apart in other ways so young people get the raw end both times. Many of these older folk will be on rent controlled flats that are not available to young people, for example.