‘Viable’ Companies
The bill does not clarify what is meant by ‘viable’ companies and how and by whom it is determined whether a company is viable. Therefore, according to the Advisory Division, it is insufficiently clear which employers may use the proposed scheme.
Short-time working scheme
The existing short-time working scheme has supported employers affected by small-scale crises for several decades. This scheme functions well but is currently a policy rule. The Advisory Division understands that this scheme is now being codified in law, albeit in a somewhat modified form. This increases legal certainty for employers and employees.
Small-scale and large-scale crises
The Advisory Division also supports the governments desire to prepare for future large-scale crises. However, it doubts whether the proposed scheme will be sufficiently effective for that purpose. It points to the differences between small-scale and large-scale crises. Both crises are unpredictable, but the severity, duration, and recovery period from the pre-crisis situation are usually quickly estimated after a crisis has occurred. Characteristic of large-scale crises is that they are precisely not predictable, neither in terms of nature, severity, course, duration, and consequences, nor in the frequency with which such a large-scale crisis occurs. This requires different instruments and solutions than a small-scale crisis. The bill does not provide for this.
Flexibility of the employment contract
The Advisory Division endorses the need to increase the flexibility of permanent employment contracts and to take labor law measures to achieve this. However, the proposed labor law measures are limited to a crisis situation. The flexibility of the labor market is not increased, while the measures do lead to greater complexity.
Conclusion
The Advisory Division advises the government not to submit the bill to the House of Representatives unless it is amended.