Anyway in most of the EU, by law and by convention^ people don't get fired often. When they do, it's a part of a greater process where a department is reorganized, jobs have been made redundant or somesuch. Firing individuals for below average performance is rare. It needs to be an extreme. If it is dines, it's done as part of a performance review) evaluation process with feedback, time...
The reality is that
^The convention part is important. Regardless of laws, it's very hard to operate a business that's firing a lot. Firing someone is like exiling/outlawing them, to borrow analogies from older societies.
If you try, you'll encounter a huge pile of difficulties. Moral/culture will be one. Politics will be another.
Assuming we're just talking about "not quite the best" work performance here.
It also depends on how you choose to exercise your rights. Many countries have a lot of ways to push back if you are fired, but afaik they aren't automatic.
Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal
> Trust them to produce, and if they are not producing, let them go.
If you are firing someone for performance, you have done a performance review. It's just that it might be entirely in your head or based on office gossip about who appears most productive.
You wouldn't optimise a program without a profiler, so you shouldn't make hire/fire decisions on productivity without some means of measuring productivity. I know it's hard and tends to result in stupid metrics, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be attempted.