"There is no protection against dismissal, but dismissal due to illness does still not happen. We have full employment and for a work visa the requirements are higher, the lower the requirements in that job are. Labour is a rare commodity. Someone on sick leave is not costing the company anything anyway, so why fire them. Employers are only obliged to pay wages for any work done. Everything else is paid by the state. When someone is on sick leave, he or she receives full wage compensation as sick pay from the health insurance from the first day up to one month per year. From the second month onwards, a percentage of the wage that decreases over time is paid. The employee does not have to apply for this. He only has to give his sick certificate to his employer. The employer pays his wage as sick pay and can deduct the amount from his remaining health insurance contributions. If someone is dismissed, he can receive full unemployment pay from the first day up to one month per year. From the second month owards, it is again a percentage that decreases over time. The unemployed person must apply for unemployment pay at the Social Court. The application is one page and proof of dismissal. If he or she has received sick pay before, he or she will not receive more money, because he or she will then receive unemployment pay. You will continue to receive the percentage you have already reached until you bring it back up through contributions. Sick pay, unemployment pay, it's all the same. You don't work. Welfare payments do not have a maximum duration. After four years, you automatically reach a minimum amount. This amount is then paid for the rest of your life, if that is necessary."
"The health insurance pays full wages from the first day?"
"Yes, of course."
"Isn't that too expensive for the state?"
"We can afford that. We are a successful country. We have full employment, pay practically no unemployment pay and hardly any other welfare payments. Tax evasion is non-existent because taxes are low, but the potential penalties are in some cases business-endingly high. Employer contributions to health insurance are also somewhat higher than usual. That all balances out. We do it this way to ensure that employees who are sick more often or on long-term sick leave don't always lose their jobs straight away. It's also less bureaucracy this way. The employer always has to pay his contributions to the health insurance anyway. If, on the other hand, continued payment of wages is only possible up to a certain time limit, after which the health insurance steps in, then the employee has to go to his health insurance to apply for it. Isn't that an unnecessary waste of time?"
Mr Jens shook his head deprecatingly.
"Don't you not also just pay so little welfare because basically everyone who is lying half-dead in hospital still has an employment contract?"
"Yes, so what? That doesn't make any difference. If someone is seriously ill and can't come to work for several years, they still don't get fired, or only when they're well again. Isn't that a nice thing? What do I care what money I pay out over what corners. It's all one pot."
"The lack of protection against dismissal also applies to public companies?"
"Yes, it applies to state companies too. Anyone who is redundant or does a bad job has to go."
"Ah, but I know something else! Public companies lack innovation. They only ever do what the state wants them to do. There are never any grand ideas."
Marah was just about to drink, but had to put her cup down again so as not to spill anything as she started laughing.
"Hahaha, lack of innovation? Is that what you learned in business school? The reality is different. When you get a vaccine or a medicine, when you buy a chemical, when you buy new technology, in every case the research for it was state-funded. That is always the case. Nobody would put their money into uncertainties just for the sake of it. If someone wants to research something, they first get government funding, and if they don't get it, they don't research it. If not everything were financed by the state, there wouldn't even be washing powder today. There are also a lot of things from military research that you wouldn't expect. Rubber tyres, binoculars and cans, to name just a few examples. Private investment is only supplementary or for research that can't fail, so mainly for product research and for market research and stupid studies, of which you can throw half of them away because they cannot deliver no results."
"Hmm... But that's all I can think of. So you would say that in the end your public companies are just like private companies?"
"No, I would not. How can public companies compete with private companies, you asked? But that is not really the right question. The right question would be, how do other countries manage that their public companies can't keep up with private companies, even though they have the state behind them? The most successful pharmaceutical company in the world is our state company Rotkäppchen, and that is so even though we practically give away the products domestically. In other countries, the subsidies are public, the losses are public, but the profits are private. Performance is not rewarded because that would increase the costs, which the poorly performing state company cannot afford. Bad staff is not cut, but kept because the state does not want to pay welfare, although in the end this causes higher costs for the state. But that goes unnoticed because everything is always just looked at in isolation. Our state companies don't need to make any effort to keep up with private companies. They are fundamentally superior."
"I just want to say that I don't see it that way."
"Then please let me give my reasons, and afterwards I will be happy to address your arguments."
"Please. Go ahead," Mr Jens declared, devoting himself to his coffee.
"Our state companies all have a set profit margin that has to be achieved. There is a minimum wage and a performance-related bonus if the nature of the work allows it to be measured. If someone can maintain or improve his numbers, he gets his bonus and can be promoted. If someone cannot achieve his numbers, he receives no bonus and can be degraded or dismissed. If someone is suspected of corruption, he is dismissed and never gets another job in any state company. You would think that would be the case in any company, but big companies in particular struggle with corruption and incompetence at all levels. Let me give you an example on how this can happen. When you are older, you will probably work in the Free Banks, but you will certainly not sit at the counter of a branch, but in the head office in the executive floor and maybe even as a managing director. Would you say there is no one in the world who could do that better than you?"
"Um..."
The boy was seemingly pondering what would be a wise response, but in the end nothing came out of his mouth.
"It doesn't matter if it is true or not. You will get the job as long as your father is pushing for it. It happens all over the world. Someone ends up in a position he is not qualified for because he has shares or contacts or is part of the family. By the time he is replaced, the damage is done. In our state companies, something like this cannot happen. For example, if someone wants to get into the position of managing director, the human resources department checks his file, but whether he is hired is in the case of the managing director decided by the entire staff. The human resources department only ever does the pre-screening. New employees still have to have several interviews with them after they have been hired. For example, they ask how they have settled in, how they rate their own performance so far or whether they have any suggestions for improvements in the company. These interviews are important to train the human resources department. In many companies, they hire people they never see again. You can't learn anything if you don't get any feedback and don't have to bear the consequences of you decisions, that's why these conversations are so important. Then when the managing director starts, he gets minimum wage like everyone else. The only difference between the janitor and the managing director is the scale of the bonus payments. Negotiation skills or sympathy do not help. Who can earn how much is determined by the financial court. If the company cannot reach the minimum profit requirement, the manager earns as much as any other employee. Namely, only the minimum wage. Maybe the manager is not to blame for the poor result, but that is an occupational hazard. State companies are not responsible for ensuring the prosperity of individuals. If the manager is not able to produce sufficient performance from his position, then he will have to sell his house to earn money. If the company fails once more to meet the minimum profit in the next assessment period, the accountants from the fiscal court come and dismiss everyone who is to blame or shut down the entire company. Along the way, there are also many ways to call a full or partial staff meeting. For example, staff from a lower level of management can make a motion to dismiss staff from a higher level of management. If the majority of the staff relevant to the chosen procedure decides that, for example, the managing director is no longer tenable, he or she will her as well be dismissed. There is no severance pay in any case. Dismissal is an occupational hazard. Again, one would think that would be normal, but strangely enough it is not."
"That all sounds terrible. Why would anyone volunteer to work for a company like that?"
~I'm sure it sounds terrible to you.~
"One of the reasons is the pleasant working atmosphere. If you cause trouble, you don't stay long if the rest can throw you out. Our state companies have real flat hierarchies. Everyone is allowed to have a say. Everyone bears a share of the responsibility. Every employee who helps lead the company to success benefits from the company's success through his or her own bonus. If the company can reach the profit cap, then especially the lower employees earn far more with us than in the same position in a private company. We also have company animals, company sports, sports teams, shared housing, provied housing close to the place of work and also always free food. When a position becomes available, we are usually drowning in applicants. People with self-confidence who know how to earn money come to us. People we fire go to the private sector where they can fuck up with impunity. If the Financial Court didn't impose a profit cap, our state companies would completely eat up the world economy in the long run. People just work much more efficiently when they are treated well and they know that it is personally beneficial for them to not just do their time. At our food producer Ebensbach, half of the processing staff is currently on special paid leave because they made too much money again. It's terrible. I wanted to teach my parliament how to make a reasonable household. If they always have so much money, then they won't learn anything. After all, the profits of all state companies go into the state coffers, which is why we can afford such low taxes. We collect the money differently."
What Marah had omitted in her explanation was that the minimum profit of state companies could also be negative. This was necessary in order to provide certain services to citizens at low cost or free of charge, or because a positive balance was not possible due to external factors. A hospital, for example, could not make a profit. Baele did have many hospitals abroad that made very high profits, but calling them such was misleading. They were not really hospitals. They were operation rooms with revolving doors. Even if you were rich, you never got the best treatment, you only ever got the most expensive one with the shortest stay that was possible.
"There is no protection against dismissal, but dismissal due to illness does still not happen. We have full employment and for a work visa the requirements are higher, the lower the requirements in that job are. Labour is a rare commodity. Someone on sick leave is not costing the company anything anyway, so why fire them. Employers are only obliged to pay wages for any work done. Everything else is paid by the state. When someone is on sick leave, he or she receives full wage compensation as sick pay from the health insurance from the first day up to one month per year. From the second month onwards, a percentage of the wage that decreases over time is paid. The employee does not have to apply for this. He only has to give his sick certificate to his employer. The employer pays his wage as sick pay and can deduct the amount from his remaining health insurance contributions. If someone is dismissed, he can receive full unemployment pay from the first day up to one month per year. From the second month owards, it is again a percentage that decreases over time. The unemployed person must apply for unemployment pay at the Social Court. The application is one page and proof of dismissal. If he or she has received sick pay before, he or she will not receive more money, because he or she will then receive unemployment pay. You will continue to receive the percentage you have already reached until you bring it back up through contributions. Sick pay, unemployment pay, it's all the same. You don't work. Welfare payments do not have a maximum duration. After four years, you automatically reach a minimum amount. This amount is then paid for the rest of your life, if that is necessary."
"The health insurance pays full wages from the first day?"
"Yes, of course."
"Isn't that too expensive for the state?"
"We can afford that. We are a successful country. We have full employment, pay practically no unemployment pay and hardly any other welfare payments. Tax evasion is non-existent because taxes are low, but the potential penalties are in some cases business-endingly high. Employer contributions to health insurance are also somewhat higher than usual. That all balances out. We do it this way to ensure that employees who are sick more often or on long-term sick leave don't always lose their jobs straight away. It's also less bureaucracy this way. The employer always has to pay his contributions to the health insurance anyway. If, on the other hand, continued payment of wages is only possible up to a certain time limit, after which the health insurance steps in, then the employee has to go to his health insurance to apply for it. Isn't that an unnecessary waste of time?"
Mr Jens shook his head deprecatingly.
"Don't you not also just pay so little welfare because basically everyone who is lying half-dead in hospital still has an employment contract?"
"Yes, so what? That doesn't make any difference. If someone is seriously ill and can't come to work for several years, they still don't get fired, or only when they're well again. Isn't that a nice thing? What do I care what money I pay out over what corners. It's all one pot."
"The lack of protection against dismissal also applies to public companies?"
"Yes, it applies to state companies too. Anyone who is redundant or does a bad job has to go."
"Ah, but I know something else! Public companies lack innovation. They only ever do what the state wants them to do. There are never any grand ideas."
Marah was just about to drink, but had to put her cup down again so as not to spill anything as she started laughing.
"Hahaha, lack of innovation? Is that what you learned in business school? The reality is different. When you get a vaccine or a medicine, when you buy a chemical, when you buy new technology, in every case the research for it was state-funded. That is always the case. Nobody would put their money into uncertainties just for the sake of it. If someone wants to research something, they first get government funding, and if they don't get it, they don't research it. If not everything were financed by the state, there wouldn't even be washing powder today. There are also a lot of things from military research that you wouldn't expect. Rubber tyres, binoculars and cans, to name just a few examples. Private investment is only supplementary or for research that can't fail, so mainly for product research and for market research and stupid studies, of which you can throw half of them away because they cannot deliver no results."
"Hmm... But that's all I can think of. So you would say that in the end your public companies are just like private companies?"
"No, I would not. How can public companies compete with private companies, you asked? But that is not really the right question. The right question would be, how do other countries manage that their public companies can't keep up with private companies, even though they have the state behind them? The most successful pharmaceutical company in the world is our state company Rotkäppchen, and that is so even though we practically give away the products domestically. In other countries, the subsidies are public, the losses are public, but the profits are private. Performance is not rewarded because that would increase the costs, which the poorly performing state company cannot afford. Bad staff is not cut, but kept because the state does not want to pay welfare, although in the end this causes higher costs for the state. But that goes unnoticed because everything is always just looked at in isolation. Our state companies don't need to make any effort to keep up with private companies. They are fundamentally superior."
"I just want to say that I don't see it that way."
"Then please let me give my reasons, and afterwards I will be happy to address your arguments."
"Please. Go ahead," Mr Jens declared, devoting himself to his coffee.
"Our state companies all have a set profit margin that has to be achieved. There is a minimum wage and a performance-related bonus if the nature of the work allows it to be measured. If someone can maintain or improve his numbers, he gets his bonus and can be promoted. If someone cannot achieve his numbers, he receives no bonus and can be degraded or dismissed. If someone is suspected of corruption, he is dismissed and never gets another job in any state company. You would think that would be the case in any company, but big companies in particular struggle with corruption and incompetence at all levels. Let me give you an example on how this can happen. When you are older, you will probably work in the Free Banks, but you will certainly not sit at the counter of a branch, but in the head office in the executive floor and maybe even as a managing director. Would you say there is no one in the world who could do that better than you?"
"Um..."
The boy was seemingly pondering what would be a wise response, but in the end nothing came out of his mouth.
"It doesn't matter if it is true or not. You will get the job as long as your father is pushing for it. It happens all over the world. Someone ends up in a position he is not qualified for because he has shares or contacts or is part of the family. By the time he is replaced, the damage is done. In our state companies, something like this cannot happen. For example, if someone wants to get into the position of managing director, the human resources department checks his file, but whether he is hired is in the case of the managing director decided by the entire staff. The human resources department only ever does the pre-screening. New employees still have to have several interviews with them after they have been hired. For example, they ask how they have settled in, how they rate their own performance so far or whether they have any suggestions for improvements in the company. These interviews are important to train the human resources department. In many companies, they hire people they never see again. You can't learn anything if you don't get any feedback and don't have to bear the consequences of you decisions, that's why these conversations are so important. Then when the managing director starts, he gets minimum wage like everyone else. The only difference between the janitor and the managing director is the scale of the bonus payments. Negotiation skills or sympathy do not help. Who can earn how much is determined by the financial court. If the company cannot reach the minimum profit requirement, the manager earns as much as any other employee. Namely, only the minimum wage. Maybe the manager is not to blame for the poor result, but that is an occupational hazard. State companies are not responsible for ensuring the prosperity of individuals. If the manager is not able to produce sufficient performance from his position, then he will have to sell his house to earn money. If the company fails once more to meet the minimum profit in the next assessment period, the accountants from the fiscal court come and dismiss everyone who is to blame or shut down the entire company. Along the way, there are also many ways to call a full or partial staff meeting. For example, staff from a lower level of management can make a motion to dismiss staff from a higher level of management. If the majority of the staff relevant to the chosen procedure decides that, for example, the managing director is no longer tenable, he or she will her as well be dismissed. There is no severance pay in any case. Dismissal is an occupational hazard. Again, one would think that would be normal, but strangely enough it is not."
"That all sounds terrible. Why would anyone volunteer to work for a company like that?"
~I'm sure it sounds terrible to you.~
"One of the reasons is the pleasant working atmosphere. If you cause trouble, you don't stay long if the rest can throw you out. Our state companies have real flat hierarchies. Everyone is allowed to have a say. Everyone bears a share of the responsibility. Every employee who helps lead the company to success benefits from the company's success through his or her own bonus. If the company can reach the profit cap, then especially the lower employees earn far more with us than in the same position in a private company. We also have company animals, company sports, sports teams, shared housing, provied housing close to the place of work and also always free food. When a position becomes available, we are usually drowning in applicants. People with self-confidence who know how to earn money come to us. People we fire go to the private sector where they can fuck up with impunity. If the Financial Court didn't impose a profit cap, our state companies would completely eat up the world economy in the long run. People just work much more efficiently when they are treated well and they know that it is personally beneficial for them to not just do their time. At our food producer Ebensbach, half of the processing staff is currently on special paid leave because they made too much money again. It's terrible. I wanted to teach my parliament how to make a reasonable household. If they always have so much money, then they won't learn anything. After all, the profits of all state companies go into the state coffers, which is why we can afford such low taxes. We collect the money differently."
What Marah had omitted in her explanation was that the minimum profit of state companies could also be negative. This was necessary in order to provide certain services to citizens at low cost or free of charge, or because a positive balance was not possible due to external factors. A hospital, for example, could not make a profit. Baele did have many hospitals abroad that made very high profits, but calling them such was misleading. They were not really hospitals. They were operation rooms with revolving doors. Even if you were rich, you never got the best treatment, you only ever got the most expensive one with the shortest stay that was possible.
