1 min read
I've just seen a ridiculous, gushing report on the BBC1 Six O'Clock News about the Sharon Coleman ECJ case which will give carers of the disabled the same rights as the disabled themselves.
The reporter, Catherine Marston, seemed almost overjoyed at the result, listing the many benefits of the decision and how wonderful it will be that employers will now have to give time off to carers whenever they need to look after their charges.
There was not a word, not a reference, to the idea that there could be another side to the story - that it might not be such a great idea for employers to be forced to start acting as welfare providers to employees who happen to look after the disabled.
But why? If I employ someone who has a disabled child, why should I be forced by law to allow her as much time off as she needs to look after that child? Why should I even have to employ her in the first place, let alone to hand over my money so she can look after her child? What does it have to do with me? Why is it my responsibility?
So much for making European indutsry more competitive.