by Ross Clark - Wednesday, 5th September 2007 -

Like many self-employed people, I employ my wife to help me with a bit of secretarial and research work.

We don't have too many arguments over the fax machine, but I guess if I ever decided I didn't need her help any more she wouldn't be too upset if I removed her from the payroll.

The government, however, has decided that small businesses can no longer be trusted to operate along the informal lines that they previously did.

From October 1, all businesses, whether they be an international conglomerate or a two man window-cleaning business, will be bound by the new Employment Act 2002 (Dispute Resolution) Regulations.

Henceforth, I will need to draw up a written policy laying out exactly how I intend to deal with the situation should my wife accidentally put sugar in my coffee, or hit the wrong button on the computer and delete an entire year's work.

Should I wish to dismiss her, I will have to go through a five point procedure, as described on the Department of Trade and Industry website.

First, I will have to call her to a formal meeting to discuss her shortcomings, to which she will have the right to bring along a colleague or trade union representative (the DTI doesn’t mention if our pet cat or the mother-in-law would be allowed).

And if her performance does not improve, I can then issue her with a final written warning.

If I still want to go ahead with sacking her, I must then prepare a written statement, setting out what she has done wrong, or has failed to do.

Then I must hold a hearing, to which my wife may again bring along a colleague or trade union official.

Finally, I may sack her, although I must make it quite clear that she is allowed to appeal. The appeal, states the DTI bumf, should be held by a “more senior manager” than the one who held the hearing.

I'm not quite sure how I am supposed to organise this – maybe I'm supposed to put on a better suit and chomp a cigar.

The DTI helpfully goes to explain: “If the size of your firm makes [finding a more senior manager] impossible you will need to make extra effort to deal with the matter impartially.”

In other words, I hold a hearing to sack my wife, then I have to hold an appeal at which I am expected to decide whether my decision to sack her was fair or not, and if necessary reverse my original decision.

The whole thing is so absurd that I had to read the new regulations twice just to make sure I wasn't fooling myself. I wasn't.

In a press release DTI minister Gerry Sutcliffe makes it quite clear that the Employment Act 2002 (Dispute Resolution) Regulations apply to all businesses “regardless of size”.

I don't doubt that formal disciplinary procedures make sense for a strike-ridden state industry like the Post Office, but to impose statutory procedures on small companies that don't have a history of sour labour relations is plain barmy.

How many government ministers have ever worked in a small business? The truth is that few have any conception of employment other than in a large public organisation.

One needn't expect the government to abide by the same rules that it applies to others, mind.

If the Prime Minister ever decides to dismiss Gerry Sutcliffe in a ministerial reshuffle, what likelihood is there that it will be strung out over several weeks' worth of hearings and appeals? None.

Tony Blair will simply call Mr Sutcliffe to 10 Downing Street, tell him he has got to make way for some fresh blood, and that will be that.

In a small concession to common sense, the DTI does at least recognise a few circumstances in which employers may be able to dismiss staff without going through the full five point statutory disciplinary procedure, such as “when it is not possible for employment to continue, for example when a factory burns down”.

I don't know about factories burning down, but I guess there will be a lot of office walls damaged as small business owner-managers are driven to banging their heads against them in frustration.