[BlobberSnobber]

Always someone with a horrible opinion to give in this hellsite

[asadalt]

i have had to avoid hiring excellent candidate(s) from EU, just because they would become unflushable if it comes to that.

[noisy_boy]

> just because they would become unflushable if it comes to that

Your choice of verb tells a lot about what you think of your employees.

[nkrisc]

The fact you refer to people as “unflushable” or “useless” is chilling.

[qmmmur]

If your business is contingent on the behaviour of one employee then you have failed to hire properly or build a resilient business...

In many cases problematic employees can and are removed from EU companies.

[gavinflud]

How exactly would they become "unflushable"?

Also, surely if they were excellent candidates then you'd be doing your absolute best to keep them around?

[Sonnigeszeug]

Thats just not true.

You don't sound like a big company ceo. If you have a good reason, even as a small company, and revenue / affordability is one, you can fire people.

You just need to be able to pay them for min. 3 month if thats your contract length and as a business owner you should know how to calculate.

[dani__german]

people are getting quite snippy about this comment, but hating this mindset means you lock yourself away from so much actual wealth. It means you confine and condemn people to significantly worse economic conditions by limiting people's ability to freely associate and disassociate.

just to hammer this point home: Every mandatory employee benefit has a huge cost, and adding enough of them kills your economy. It makes it more expensive to have an employee than X many jobs can justify. That X grows every year, and that's X people who cant do that job and get paid money for it.

[rwmj]

Please post the name of your company so we can be sure to avoid it.

[perching_aix]

"had to"