All the controversy about the Small Labour Act is pointless, because the Act cannot achieve its purpose if it is designed in this way. The problem is that the cost of small-scale work under the proposed law is significantly lower than the cost of permanent work. It is therefore clear that employers will be tempted to employ people under the small employment law, and the social security of employees will be correspondingly lower. The only solution I see is for the legislator to set the rules of the game in such a way that the form of employment which is supposed to offer greater social security (permanent work ?) will be cheaper for the employer than fixed-term employment. Since permanent work is already poorly paid (guaranteed OD), the legislator should set a much higher price (net hourly wage) for fixed-term work. This would lead to employers gravitating towards permanent employment and workers towards fixed-term employment.