The political commitment to full employment is an important part of the framework within which divergent interest groups in developed market-economy countries have tried to promote economic progress with social justice. In countries with centrally planned economies, guaranteed employment is a basic principle--a right and duty of every citizen. In the developing world, steady remunerative work for all who wish it remains an elusive ideal, although the number of employed is increasing and has even reached a majority in some countries. Current unemployment levels have a high social cost. employment, or at least prospects of it, is an important element in the individual's and family's well-being, even aside from the income derived from a job. Unemployment today has more serious consequences than in decades past. Unemployment bears particularly heavily on two age groups--the young who may never have worked and older workers who may never work again. The structural changes in unemployment need to be seen in the context of large shifts in the work force that have been occurring over a longer period. The two most significant have been the decline in the proportion of men aged 15-64 in the work force and the sharp increase in the proportion of women of the same age group. A dominant factor in the decreasing proportion of men in the labor force has been the withdrawal in large numbers of men in or just past their prime, particularly in European countries. However, what rights and obligations have employers and employees toward each other in Western Labor Market? In this paper I would like show law obligations of employees and employers in a case of Sebastian vs. Arabella and Luigi. "Francesco owns an exclusive and very popular restaurant employing three chefs, each of whom specialize in a particular culinary skill, and eight waitresses. Arabella, one of the waitresses, has been absent from work due to illness for six months. She has been diagnosed as suffering from nervous exhaustion and stress. Sebastian, one of the waiters, arrived for work smelling of alcohol and slurring his speech. Francesco asked him if he was drunk. Sebastian swore at Francesco and told him to mind his own business. Francesco sacked him on the spot. Luigi, one of the chefs, has been arrested for criminal damage and assault. He is in custody pending his trial. Francesco has been advised that Luigi will probably receive a prison sentence if found guilty. Luigi is protesting his innocence. ". After reading thoroughly the supposed case of Francesco I found that the relative law is the Wages Act 1986. " The Act provides for a remedy inspect of deductions from wages, with special provisions for retail employment; ((4)NM. Selwyn, Selwyn's Law of employment, 10th edition, pg. 512). Through the above we can understand that the employer has right to deduct any amount from employees wages. In our case the Francesco can implement this law to subtract the fifty pounds per month from Luigi's wage. According to (5) a deduction from the company to the wage of an employee is unless it is authorized in one of these ways. First the deduction may be authorized by statute. Clearly there is nothing wrong with deducting PAYe contributions and the like. Secondly, it may be authorized by a term of employee's contract, provided that either the contract is in writing or the term in notified in writing to the employees before the deduction is made (1). ...
Related Economics essays
0
Preparing Orders
0
Active Writers
0%
Positive Feedback
0
Support Agents