SIMON WATKINS: Osborne's 株 計画（する） won't work ...and here's why

By Simon Watkins for The Mail on Sunday

Updated: 22:34 BST, 13 October 2012

George Osborne 苦しむd a 厳しい attack of Gordon Brownism at the 保守党 会議／協議会 last week with his 提案 that em ployees might 交換（する） some of their 雇用 権利s for 株 in the company for which they work. It is not the 政策 itself ? something いっそう少なく Brownite could scarcely be imagined.

No, it is the fact that the 計画／陰謀 is so ill-considered and would 要求する such Byzantine 支配するs to work that makes it like one of Gordon’s micro-managed? 政策s. Think Working Family 税金 Credits.

欠陥d ideas: George Osborne during his speech at the party 会議／協議会 in Birmingham

Many commentators have 簡単に bemoaned the unfairness of trying to buy 労働者s out of their hard-won 権利s. And anyone should think very carefully before 降伏するing their 権利s to redundancy 支払う／賃金 or 不公平な 解雇／（訴訟の）却下 （人命などを）奪う，主張するs.

But what is eq ually damning about this 提案 is the fact that it appears to be so 不正に thought out. The 計画（する） raises a bewildering number of questions and problems. 株 in 私的な companies have no (a)自動的な／(n)自動拳銃 market value so a 過程 would need to be 始める，決める up to 始める，決める fair values on 在庫／株 used in these 計画／陰謀s. What type of 在庫／株 will be 適格の? Will the 株 問題／発行するd to staff have to give 投票（する）ing 権利s? Will they have to be 適格の for （株主への）配当s?

Some companies might 申し込む／申し出 an 従業員 権利s 交換（する） for 株 連合させるd with a 株 buyback 申し込む／申し出. In practice this would mean staff were swapping their 権利s for a cash sum. This would 明確に break the ーするつもりであるd spirit of the 計画／陰謀 ? would there need to be 支配するs to stop this?

There could? also be a host of 税金 （法などの）抜け穴s created by these 計画／陰謀s.
And what if a company that operates the new 雇用 計画／陰謀 buys or is bought by a company that does not? Under 現在の 法律s 従業員s’ 条件 cannot be changed in the event? of a 引き継ぎ／買収.

Would that 法律 have to be changed too, or would a 会社／堅い have to have 従業員s on two fundamentally different types? of 契約?

On 最高の，を越す of all this lawyers point out it will be very hard to 確実にする 従業員s really have 調印するd away the 重要な 権利s 関心d. Some are 保護するd not by UK 法律制定 but by EU 法律s.

What is more, a staff member may have 降伏するd their 権利 to 告訴する for wrongful 解雇／（訴訟の）却下,? but what about 差別? on grounds of race, sex or age?

支持者s of Osborne’s 計画（する） will argue that all of this can be アイロンをかけるd out in the 詳細（に述べる）s, but even if you think it is 望ましい to turn 合法的な 権利s into a tradeable 商品／必需品 the 障害s and the 複雑化s to such a 計画／陰謀 look insurmountable. Far from cutting red tape, it would be a 借り切る／憲章 for bureaucrats and lawyers to make hay.

Without 疑問 there are 抱擁する 利益s to having 従業員s owning 株 or in some other way feeling they have 所有権 of the 会社／堅い for which they work.

But 存在するing 従業員 株-所有権 計画／陰謀s or the old-fashioned 共同 model are all tried and 実験（する）d systems for inculcating that sense of 株d 利益／興味 and 責任／義務.

Osborne’s 提案 is 簡単に an unworkable gimmick and it is hard to see how he can 避ける having to massively water 負かす／撃墜する the 計画（する）s or 簡単に dropping? them altogether.

Hot pasty anyone?
?