Our forum is now closed, but other people who joined have commented:
"We have a pretty 'flexible' labour market here in the UK already. What we don't have is much help for people who want to get a job - you have to wait ages to be eligible for help from one of the New Deal programmes and benefit rates are pittance"
"Such flexibility is fine where rented accommodation is the norm. When we compare ourselves with other countries we need to bear this in mind. It's much easier to take a job in a different locality when you are in rented accommodation, but much more difficult when you own your own home....younger people are already struggling with mortgage repayments don't find it easy to move, or cope with periods of unemployment"
"I don't see the need for 'flexicurity' - employers already have the opportunity to take on new employees by way of short term renewable contracts. It's a one sided system where employers can just hire and fire people more easily. Protect our current employee rights!!"
"If hiring and firing is made easier this could also mean that as staff get older, employers will hire younger staff (pay less, inexperienced in life/work etc.) ....also flexible working is becoming more and more available (flexi systems, parents of young children/carers etc.) as this benefits both employer and employees.
The benefit system will not be effective in any shape or form should one partner in a couple become unemployed, mortgages, bills etc. will have been assessed on the 2 incomes and if one partner remains in work and the other is unemployed there will not be any benefits that they can claim. What about pensions etc.? Moving employees to other jobs within the firm could mean travelling long distance/travel costs to other locations, poor training if any etc.....This is not the answer!"