>- labor laws (very hard to fire people in many European countries)
That's just not true now and hasn't been the case anymore since like the 2009 financial crisis. In most of Europe it's trivial to fire an underperforming non-unionized employee as the countries have adapted more business friendly laws to remain competitive after the financial crisis. Sure, there may still be some grey beards somewhere with old bulletproof contracts but for anyone entering the tech workforce now, getting fired is a rubber stamp basically especially since tech workers are not unionized and sometimes benefit from less protection than even some blue-collar professions which are unionized.
For example, in Austria you can fire anyone for no reason at all as long as you give them their notice period(usually 1 to 3 months) without them being entitled to any other financial compensation from their employer. Moreover, non-competes are legal here without any form of compensation and you can even fire employees while they're on sick leave. All this legally!
The whole you can't get fired in Europe maybe only applies to Scandinavia or France but it's mostly a meme nowadays.
Actually, contrary to popular belief, tech workers in California might enjoy better protection than tech workers in some European countries. Let that sink in for a bit.
Compared to the US it's still very hard to fire people in most EU countries. In large parts of the US you can fire anyone at anytime [1].
On the other hand Silicon Valley is in California and has some of the strongest labor laws of the US, so if this is such a huge factor why is everyone in SV?
Even under the assumption that it's an important factor, would it be worth it for EU to adopt such policies considering the very real human cost?...
I live in Switzerland and the legal status of (tech) employee is roughly the same to what you describe. I wonder if the difference isn't that firing people "at-will" just is less culturally accepted here. I feel we're in kind of a weird spot between Japan and the US in terms of how the general public conceives the relationship between an employee and an employer.
I heard about this here in Austria that Swiss laws are way more business friendly at less worker friendly than here, basically reaching at will employment.
It "at-will" in the sense that your employer doesn't need to justify firing you. But I wouldn' compare it to what they have in some states in the US.
However you still have at least 1 month notice, and often more depending on the industry and seniority. Here in Zürich the standard in tech seems to be 3 month (anecdata though).
Where it gets kinda business friendly is that if you are fired for an illegal reason, it's up to you to prove that you were instead of your employer having to prove he fired you for something reasonable. The settlements are also nothing that would deter a company to behave badly I guess.
There is also a good tradition of union-like structure in the professions that need it (the ones where one is easily replaceable basically) that give workers a nice protection and benefits. It's not like in France of course but it's far from the US, based on the stories I gleaned about on HN.
Non-competes are illegal in California. That’s likely a big reason why it is so successful. As an example neither Intel not AMD would exist if non-competes would be allowed there. Iirc Nvidia too.
It's not hard at all in Germany, I already had to do it a few times. It's just regulated, i.e. you have to follow a defined process (two written warnings first, only then the dismissal) and have proof of what happened.
The range of reasons include coming too late to work, insulting coworkers and even underperformance.
Labour laws are a nightmare in every country due to bureaucracy but that doesn't mean it's always difficult to fire people. Most companies be it in FR, DE, wherever, have good lawyers on the payroll to advise them o the easiest legal path possible to get rid of undesirable employees. If a company really wants you gone, they'll make it happen one way or another.
France was famous for their approach of making an employees' life miserable in order to make them leave as they couldn't fire them easily. Honestly, I'd rather just be fired and get on unemployment than be subjected to psychological torture every day in a poisonous work environment.
> If a company really wants you gone, they'll make it happen one way or another.
Well they usually do it by compensating the employee quite heavily. Psychologically torturing an employee isn't that good for team morale, even if the employee was underperforming. I also don't think it's as culturally prevalent as you imply.
>Well they usually do it by compensating the employee quite heavily.
Where outside of the US/UK does that happen? Never heard in Europe that you get paid more so you leave when they can boot you out for free and I talked to lawyers about this. The reasoning behind the generous safety nets in Europe is also to make it easier for employee-employer terminations in case it doesn't work out. The laws here are that employers aren't allowed to abuse you, force you into unpaid overtime, etc. but fire you for free they can otherwise nobody would dare become an entrepreneur/investor in an environment where it's impossible to fire someone.
I live in the Netherlands. After 3 years (used to be 2 years up until very recently) a worker has to be moved to a permanent contract. That makes firing a person very difficult.
> when they can boot you out for free
You can't really. It's extremely difficult and no lawyer can magically change the fact that the culture and the courts are in favor of the worker, not the employer.
Now the laws might change a bit, making the terms of termination a bit easier for the employer in the future (we'll see what the next government brings), but in general I expect it to still be quite difficult. So it may be easier to pay the employee 30K extra compensation to let him go then trying a game of psychological torture.
And if that sounds unreal to you, know that in the Netherlands employees can get paid up to 2 years if they have a nervous breakdown. And nervous breakdown is quite common culturally. So employees have dirty tricks of their own if the employer wants to play dirty.
Now of course, there are obvious disadvantages to this approach, not necessarily for the employer actually. The employer can protect himself by simply not hiring anyone for more than a couple of years, making "flex work" a real problem in NL. But yes, firing could be hard and I'd be surprised if it's much different in Germany/France etc.
>the fact that the culture and the courts are in favor of the worker
As much as I like being on the side of the little guy, in any civilized society, the courts should be impartial and not favor the employer nor the employee and pass verdicts based on the law and not based on the culture and if the law says you can fire someone who continuously underperforms over a period of time then that law will be applied.
>After 3 years [...] a worker has to be moved to a permanent contract.
That sounds pretty poor IMHO. In most of the EU you're permanent after passing the first year of employment. I've never worked more than 3 years in a place so far, so in the NL I would have never reached permanent status, continuously being at the risk of on the spot termination. I dunno man, sounds pretty bad for me IMHO.
>And nervous breakdown is quite common culturally.
That actually sounds legit bad IMHO if mental issues are the becoming the norm in employment relationships.
>The employer can protect himself by simply not hiring anyone for more than a couple of years, making "flex work" a real problem in NL
I used to work for a top NL based company and this situation was often discussed around the office that NL companies are abusing expat workers from poorer countries by promising them riches in exchange for hard work and sacrifice and instead using them for 2-3 years then rotating them with new workers until they get fed up with this and move back to their home countries. Rinse and repeat. Sounds really good for Dutch business though.
> I used to work for a top NL based company and this situation was often discussed around the office that NL companies are abusing expat workers promising them riches and instead using them for 2-3 years then rotating them with new workers until they get fed up with this and move back to their home countries
I really haven't experienced this at all. Tons of expats I know are on permanent contract (btw - many employers offer a permanent contract after 1-1.5 years if they're happy with the emplyoee, at least that's what I see in tech). Of course people in the hotel/entertainment business may have a different experience. I bet flex work is more common there.
> That actually sounds legit bad IMHO if mental issues are the becoming the norm in employment relationships.
I didn't say mental issues are the norm in the Netherlands, lol. Far from it, it's one of the happiest countries in the world according to research. I'm just saying - the law enables you to take a LONG paid leave if you have burnout. Now some employees actually get burned out, and some are probably abusing it a bit. When you're protecting employees there'll always be people who dishonestly try to take advantage.
> Except that in any civilized society, the courts should be impartial and not favor the employer nor the employee and pass verdicts based on the law and not based on the culture and if the law says you can fire someone who continuously underperforms over a period of time then that law will be applied.
Laws have huge margins left for judge's interpretation of what is fair and just in a given case.
In Germany it's common for larger, well performing companies to retire older, less productive employees by way of 'Abfindungsprogramm' - programs that offer these employees generous monetary compensation (up to ~2-5 annual salary) in exchange for them retiring early. I know of four people who took such an offer.
That's just not true now and hasn't been the case anymore since like the 2009 financial crisis. In most of Europe it's trivial to fire an underperforming non-unionized employee as the countries have adapted more business friendly laws to remain competitive after the financial crisis. Sure, there may still be some grey beards somewhere with old bulletproof contracts but for anyone entering the tech workforce now, getting fired is a rubber stamp basically especially since tech workers are not unionized and sometimes benefit from less protection than even some blue-collar professions which are unionized.
For example, in Austria you can fire anyone for no reason at all as long as you give them their notice period(usually 1 to 3 months) without them being entitled to any other financial compensation from their employer. Moreover, non-competes are legal here without any form of compensation and you can even fire employees while they're on sick leave. All this legally!
The whole you can't get fired in Europe maybe only applies to Scandinavia or France but it's mostly a meme nowadays.
Actually, contrary to popular belief, tech workers in California might enjoy better protection than tech workers in some European countries. Let that sink in for a bit.