Use Readable text for larger type, or zoom in on the pages.
Team Council
Note — Circulated
Call for evidence: Team Council agenda item TM-001
From: Nikola Jurić, Chair, Team Council; Leipzig, Germany
To: Business owners and other contributors in any country
1. Purpose of this call
1.The Team Council invites evidence for agenda item TM-001, provisionally titled the Fair Hiring Cost Standard. The Council is examining how the costs and administrative requirements associated with employing people affect a small business’s decision to make its first hires, to add further employees, or to employ people formally rather than through another arrangement.
2.The question is practical: what does an owner have to understand, pay, register, report, and manage when hiring? The Council wants to learn which parts of the process create a material barrier, when that barrier arises, and whether it is experienced by businesses in different countries or sectors. It is not starting from the assumption that every employment cost is avoidable, or that reducing a cost in one place would have no consequence elsewhere.
3.The working proposal is to investigate a simpler and more predictable path for a business’s first ten hires. Areas for examination include phased social contributions, one-stop payroll registration, and predictable rules. These are questions for evidence and deliberation, not adopted recommendations. No standard has been adopted. Contributors are welcome to support, qualify, or oppose each part of the working proposal.
4.This call is open internationally. Reseated is an assembly of small-business owners organized in councils. Its purpose in this process is to identify recurring practices affecting members, describe them accurately, consult publicly on a
proposed response, and, if adopted, send the resulting standard to decision-makers able to consider it. The Council will not treat a single account as proof of a general pattern.
2. Why the question matters
5.Small businesses are an important part of economic life across regions and income levels. The United Nations reports that micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises account for approximately 90 per cent of businesses, 60–70 per cent of employment, and around 50 per cent of GDP worldwide.1 The International Labour Organization describes MSMEs as accounting for about 70 per cent of employment worldwide and notes that around 80 per cent operate in the informal economy.2 These figures provide context; they do not establish that employment costs alone cause informality or that the same hiring conditions apply in every country.
6.A small employer may face a different decision from a large employer. A person considering a first or second hire may have limited cash reserves, little internal payroll expertise, and few employees across whom to spread fixed administrative work. A charge that is modest in a large payroll may be significant when applied to a very small one. A registration step that is straightforward for an established employer may be difficult to interpret for an owner doing payroll for the first time. The Council seeks evidence about these distinctions rather than assuming them.
7.The issue is not limited to the amount of a contribution or tax. Owners may need to understand the full cost of employing someone, identify which authorities or providers require information, complete registrations on time, calculate payments, keep records, and respond to changes. The relevant burden may be financial, administrative, uncertain, or a combination. Contributors should describe what happened in practice, including the parts that worked well.
8.The Council is also interested in the consequences of a hiring decision. An owner may delay a hire, reduce hours, take on work personally, use a contractor, hire informally, or proceed with employment despite the burden. These outcomes
are not interchangeable. The Council asks contributors to state what they actually did, what they considered but did not do, and what they cannot confidently determine.
3. Scope and proposed areas of inquiry
9.For this call, “first ten hires” is a working description of the early stage of employment growth, not a final legal or statistical definition. Please tell the Council how many people your business employed when the relevant experience occurred, and whether the person hired was its first employee, one of its first ten employees, or a later hire. Do not assume that the phrase has the same legal meaning in every jurisdiction.
10.“Employment cost” means the cost to the business associated with employing a worker, in addition to or alongside wages. Depending on the jurisdiction and arrangement, a contributor may encounter mandatory employer contributions, payroll-related charges, insurance, required services, or costs arising from registration and administration. This list identifies possible subjects for reports; it does not assert that any particular charge exists or applies in a given country.
11.The Council is seeking evidence on three initial areas:
Whether a gradual or phased contribution schedule for very small employers, or for a limited early hiring period, could reduce a material first-hire barrier without creating an unacceptable cliff, delay, or incentive to remain small.
Whether a one-stop payroll registration process could reduce repeated data entry, uncertainty about the right authority, or the risk of missing a step, while preserving the information and protections required by the relevant system.
Whether employers can obtain and rely on predictable rules about the total cost, timing, and administration of hiring, including when costs change and what notice or guidance is available.
12.Contributors may identify other causes of difficulty, including uncertainty about worker status, timing of payments, eligibility thresholds, software or adviser costs, language barriers, or the interaction of requirements. Please distinguish
the issue you experienced from the remedy you think might address it. The Council may find that a proposed remedy is ineffective, inappropriate, or outside the scope of TM-001.
4. International legal comparison: present limits
13.This note does not set out a comparison of national employment or payroll laws. The international statistics cited above describe the scale of MSMEs and informality; they are not legal authorities and do not establish the law in any country.
14.This call makes no claim about the contribution rates, exemptions, thresholds, registration systems, or legal definitions in any named jurisdiction. Contributors should not regard this note as legal advice or as a guide to their obligations.
15.If a report raises a legal rule, the Council will record it as a reported experience until a suitable source has been checked. A contributor who wishes to submit a legal comparison may provide the country or territory, the relevant provision or official guidance, its effective date if known, and an official or otherwise reliable source. The Council will assess any such material before using it in a comparison. The current call is not a request to give legal advice to other members.
16.In later work, a comparison may need to consider whether a rule applies to the employer, the worker, or both; what conditions or thresholds trigger it; how a payment is calculated and collected; what registration is required; whether relief or a phased arrangement exists; and how a small employer can obtain an authoritative answer. These are proposed comparison questions only. They do not imply that the relevant laws have already been collected or that a particular policy design is suitable.
5. Questions for business owners
17.Please answer only what you know from your own experience. Approximate amounts are useful when exact figures cannot be shared, provided you identify them as
estimates. A short account can be valuable; completeness and clarity matter more than length.
Context. In which country or territory did the experience occur? What kind of work does the business do, described broadly enough to protect its identity? At the time, how many people did it employ, and was this a first hire or a later one of its first ten?
Decision. What hiring decision were you considering? What work needed to be done, and by when? Was the intended arrangement employment, or were you considering more than one arrangement? Please do not include a worker’s name or identifying details.
Expected cost. Before hiring, what did you expect the total cost to be? Which items were included in your estimate? If you did not know the total, what information was missing and where did you try to find it?
Actual cost. If you proceeded, what costs did the business encounter beyond wages? Give the currency, time period, and whether each amount was a one-time, recurring, or uncertain cost. If you are not comfortable giving an amount, a range or description such as “small”, “material”, or “greater than expected” is acceptable, with an explanation of what you mean.
Administration. What registrations, forms, calculations, deadlines, systems, or professional services were involved? How long did the tasks take, who completed them, and did any step have to be repeated or corrected?
Predictability. Did you know the likely cost and process before deciding? Did an amount, deadline, eligibility rule, or requirement change unexpectedly? State what changed, when you learned of it, and how it affected the decision.
Outcome. Did you hire, delay, change the number of hours, perform the work yourself, choose another arrangement, or decide not to proceed? What was the main reason? If several factors mattered, please say so rather than attributing the result to one cost alone.
Repeatability. Have you encountered the same issue more than once, in another hiring round, location, or business? If you know of similar experiences among other owners, explain how you know. Do not submit another person’s confidential information without permission.
Possible improvement. What change would have made the process clearer or more workable? Would it have changed your decision, or only reduced time or uncertainty? What possible drawback, cost, or unintended effect should the Council examine?
Evidence. What can you provide to support the account, and what should remain private? You may describe documents without attaching them. Please do not send sensitive payroll records, personal identification numbers, bank details, or information about workers that is not needed to understand the issue.
6. What counts as evidence
18.The Council welcomes first-hand accounts from business owners, as well as relevant records and carefully identified secondary information. Evidence need not be a formal study. It should, as far as possible, make clear who experienced the issue in general terms, where and when it happened, what the business was trying to do, and what the practical result was.
19.Useful material may include a dated timeline written from memory; a redacted estimate, invoice, or registration instruction; a record of time spent on payroll administration; a comparison between expected and actual costs; or a link or citation to an official rule or guidance document. A contributor may instead summarize such material and retain it privately. The Council may ask follow-up questions, but will not require a contributor to disclose a worker’s identity or a business’s name.
20.Please mark information as one of the following where applicable: direct experience; an estimate; a recollection; information received from another person; or an interpretation of a rule. If figures are approximate, say how they were estimated. If information is incomplete, identify the gap. A report that says “I do not
know” where appropriate is more useful than a precise-looking figure without a reliable basis.
21.The Council is interested in evidence that challenges the working proposal as well as evidence that supports it. For instance, a phased contribution could create a threshold effect, complicate payroll, affect workers differently, or move costs rather than remove them. A one-stop service could simplify registration but still leave employers unsure about their obligations. Predictability may improve without reducing the underlying cost. Reports on these possibilities are within scope.
22.A single report can identify a question or a possible failure mode. It cannot by itself demonstrate that a problem is widespread, frequent, consistent, or corroborated. Reports are not votes. Repetition, detail, and corroboration will be assessed separately, and the Council will not treat the number of submissions alone as proof that a proposed remedy is sound.
7. Privacy and anonymity
23.Members are anonymous unless they choose a public seat. Reports should not name the contributor’s business. Please describe it in general terms, such as a small design studio, a family-run food business, or a local repair service, only where that detail does not make identification likely. Do not name a customer, worker, adviser, official, or employer in an accusation.
24.Do not include names, addresses, account numbers, contact details, tax or identity numbers, payroll lists, or other unnecessary personal or commercially sensitive information. Before submitting a document, remove identifying details from the document itself and from its filename or metadata where possible. If a document cannot be safely redacted, describe its relevant contents instead of attaching it.
25.A report may be summarized in aggregate for internal review or public consultation. The Council will avoid publishing information that identifies a member or their business. However, a combination of details can sometimes identify a person even when a name is omitted. Contributors should keep the
account at the level of detail they consider safe and may ask that a particular detail not be quoted or published.
26.Anonymity does not mean that every submission can be independently verified. The Council may use confidential follow-up to clarify a report, but does not promise that a particular report will be accepted as corroborated. Contributors should not submit material they are not authorized to share. This call does not create an adviser-client relationship, and it is not a substitute for professional legal, accounting, tax, or employment advice.
8. How reports are counted
27.The Council uses a five-part pattern test before advancing a proposed problem toward a proposed fix: Volume, Frequency, Consistency, Spread, and Corroboration. The tests are applied to the reported problem, not to the popularity of a particular remedy. Passing a pattern test would permit further work; it would not establish that a policy has been adopted.
| Test | Question for the evidence review |
|---|---|
Volume | How many distinct, relevant reports describe the issue? Duplicate accounts or several submissions about the same event will not automatically be counted as separate experiences. |
| Test | Question for the evidence review |
|---|---|
Frequency | Does the issue recur over time or arise repeatedly in a business’s hiring process, rather than appearing only as an isolated occurrence? |
| Test | Question for the evidence review |
|---|---|
Consistency | Do separate accounts describe a materially similar mechanism or barrier? Differences in law, sector, business size, or hiring stage will be recorded rather than flattened into one claim. |
| Test | Question for the evidence review |
|---|---|
Spread | Does the issue appear across more than one country, region, sector, or business circumstance, where the available evidence allows that assessment? |
| Test | Question for the evidence review |
|---|---|
Corroboration | Is the account supported by independent accounts, records, or reliable source material? The kind and limits of the supporting material will be stated. |
28.The Council will record enough context to distinguish a unique event from a recurring experience and to avoid counting the same experience more than once where it can reasonably identify duplication. A person may submit more than one report if they describe distinct experiences, but should make that relationship clear. The Council will not infer that an issue occurs in a whole country from one report from that country.
29.At the date of this note, the Team Council has three members from three countries and has received zero reports from zero countries. This is the baseline for the Council’s evidence work, not a finding about the prevalence or absence of hiring-cost problems. The assembly as a whole has 20 members in 18
countries and five reports from five countries; four reports are recorded under Platform and one under Cashflow. There are no Team Council reports to assess against the five tests at this date.
30.The Council will describe gaps as well as findings. If evidence is concentrated in a few locations, if contributors cannot supply comparable figures, or if reports disagree, the review should say so. A lack of reports is not evidence that a practice is fair, and a large number of reports is not by itself evidence that one proposed solution is safe or effective.
9. Timeline and next steps
31.This call begins the evidence-gathering stage for TM-001. The Council will receive reports, review them against the five-part pattern test, and publish or circulate a summary of what the evidence does and does not establish. If the available material supports further action, the Council may prepare a draft fix for review. If it does not, the Council may continue gathering evidence, narrow the question, or conclude that no draft is justified at that time.
32.Any draft fix will be distinct from an adopted standard. It will state the problem it addresses, the evidence relied upon, the proposed change, and relevant risks or unanswered questions. A public consultation will provide an opportunity to comment on the wording, evidence, feasibility, and possible effects. The Council will consider the comments before taking any proposal to an Assembly ballot.
33.If the Assembly adopts a standard, the next step in the process is to send letters to the chief executives able to consider adopting it. A letter is a request, not an assurance of acceptance. Seats will be tracked by status: Proposed, Letter sent, Delivered, Replied, Signed, or Empty chair. This note makes no claim that any company or chief executive has been contacted, has replied, or has agreed to anything.
34.No calendar dates for a Team Council draft, consultation, ballot, or letters are set in this call. The Council will communicate any schedule when it is established. Contributors should submit useful evidence when available rather than waiting for a deadline that has not been announced.
10. Participation from any country and language
35.A business owner may contribute regardless of country, sector, business size, or whether the business currently employs staff. Owners who considered a first hire but did not proceed can be especially relevant. Reports may describe a completed hire, a continuing process, or a decision not to hire. Please state the country or territory so the Council can understand the context, but do not provide a precise location if that could identify you.
36.Contributors may write in the language in which they can explain the experience most accurately. If the account is translated, the original wording may be retained for clarification where the contributor agrees. Please identify any translation or interpretation involved. Do not delay a useful account merely because it is not written in English.
37.A report should be organized around one identifiable experience or question. A concise account can use these headings: country or territory; business context; hiring stage; expected and actual cost; administrative steps; decision and outcome; evidence available; proposed improvement; and privacy restrictions. Contributors need not answer every question, and may omit any item that they cannot answer safely or accurately.
38.Owners may report individually or with others, but should distinguish each person’s experience. A group submission is not automatically counted as multiple independent reports. If several owners have contributed to one account, say whether it summarizes separate experiences or a shared event. Do not include another owner’s account without their permission.
11. Questions for the Council
39.The Council will use this evidence to determine whether a clear and recurring problem exists, how it varies across contexts, and whether a proposed response deserves drafting. It will not begin with a conclusion that every business should hire in the same way or that all costs should be reduced. The objective is to identify practical barriers and examine proportionate, workable improvements.
40.The central questions remain open: Which costs or processes most affect the first ten hires? Are owners deterred mainly by the amount, the uncertainty, the administrative steps, or the interaction among them? Would a phased approach or a one-stop process materially change decisions? What protections, public functions, or worker interests must be preserved? How could any change avoid a sudden threshold, unnecessary complexity, or an unfair transfer of cost?
41.The Council invites candid evidence on those questions, including evidence that the problem is smaller, different, or more localized than expected. It will report what members say without presenting individual experiences as claims about named businesses or companies. Members’ businesses remain unnamed. The Council will proceed only as far as the evidence permits.
Sources
United Nations, Micro-, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises Day: https://www.un.org/en/observances/micro-small-medium-businesses-day
International Labour Organization, Micro, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises: https://www.ilo.org/topics-and-sectors/micro-small-and-medium-enterprises
Notes and sources
Sources
This document has no standing until adopted under the Founders Charter. Reseated Councils is not affiliated with the United Nations.