Just brainstorming here, but I wonder if one could build a market around betting on the success (but never the failure) of the hard-to-employ. Let's say I know a recovering addict who would be a good worker but employers disagree. . .
-
-
You gotta find something in it for the employer though. "Employed" as the standard for success gives the employer no motive to roll the dice on a high risk person. They can find someone who is just good enough to not fire on their own.
-
They'll only status employed if they are working well, though. It lets the system adapt to each company's criteria for making the binary choice of keep/don't keep.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Employed and 'legally employed' are two different things. In Australia we have a problem with people being paid the incorrect wages and entitlements based on their inability to find out or act to amend these details. (Most are foreign workers)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.