[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.

[asadalt]

sure i am being dramatic but my point stands. if my company can’t be fluid and can’t react fast to market due to bs unions and backward laws of some land, that place is what i avoid.

[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.

[asadalt]

many cases isn’t competitive when i can find equal talent with no such restrictions.

[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?

[weatherlite]

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

Well to be fair excellent candidates are excellent on paper. It sometimes happens (not often, but not once in a blue moon either) that the candidate turns out to be completely unsuitable for the job.

[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.

[asadalt]

vs. i can hire in canada/ukraine/india/pakistan/china for a more skilled person with no such bs restrictions.

[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.

[asadalt]

exactly, as a startup founder i wouldn’t commit to a yearly reserved ec2 instance for a year let alone an employee.

[rwmj]

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

[asadalt]

done

[perching_aix]

"had to"