The Zero Hour Contract

Graham_Devon

CLAPTON wrote: »

For the record let me say that I too would like to live in a world were everyone has a generous salary and prices are cheap and there is no unemployment.
'

That;s being disingenuous. I've only highlighted one example of what I believe to be fair on this thread, and I specifically stated it was a low paid job.

I also said I think it's fair considering the job role.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

And now, the other side of the coin....

Take the example of a retail or hospitality business where a very large percentage of the takings are in a very small number of hours per week. There are some nightclubs and bars that take 80% of their takings in a week in just 3 hours on Friday and Saturday nights, for example.

Now add in the vagaries of seasonal differences in takings, where a hospitality business for example might take £25,000 a week in December, and only £6,000 a week in Jan and Feb.

Now add in other factors, such as weather, sports tournaments where it's impossible to predict the outcomes and so scheduling needs, etc etc etc....

It's obvious that such a business cannot justify keeping the 35 staff it needs in December on the books for Jan and Feb, and equally obvious that it cannot justify keeping 35 staff working for 40 hours per week when it only needs most of them for 4 or 6 hours per week.

A zero hours contract allows the company to schedule staff when it needs them, and not schedule them when it doesn't, including for weeks where it may not need them at all thanks to the seasonal nature of these types of businesses.

The majority of these businesses will schedule staff a week or so in advance, and the majority of staff working in these jobs will work several jobs of this type. Perhaps a shop in the daytime, a cafe in the evenings, a nightclub on Friday and Saturday nights, for example. This has been the case for many years, and it offers employees and employers the flexibility they require.

Where I would agree that this is a bad thing is if this type of contract is now progressing to employer sectors where the business conditions which require such flexibility don't exist....

If that were to become the case, I could see it being abused.

Hamish we already have temporary summer employment. You are speak to someone who lives all around it.

What you are describing is the need for temporary seasonal employment. That's indisputable, and it's always the case that it will be needed.

With seasonal employment, the deal is usually that you will work for x amount of weeks for x amount of hours with an end date. That's not immoral, it's telling you what's needed, what you will do and what you will get in return.

Nothing like a zero hour contract. Though I'm not sure why I'm arguing with you as you will see any business being able to do whatever they like, keeping figures down as a good thing regardless.

BTW, agencies deal with a lot of your examples of business need.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

What you are describing is the need for temporary seasonal employment.

No, there's more to it than that.

With seasonal employment, the deal is usually that you will work for x amount of weeks for x amount of hours with an end date. That's not immoral, it's telling you what's needed, what you will do and what you will get in return.

Agreed, but again, there's far more to it than just seasonal employment in coastal tourist towns for summer. Which is a predictable straight 3-5 months of work.

Look at the other examples I gave.... For some people employment might be one week of the month (pay weekend for bars/clubs), or one weekend a month plus bank holidays, sports tournament finals, etc.

Or only 36 weeks of the year during term time in a Uni town's nightclub, so off in Summer, Easter, Xmas, etc.

There's lots of examples.

Nothing like a zero hour contract. Though I'm not sure why I'm arguing with you as you will see any business being able to do whatever they like, keeping figures down as a good thing regardless.

No, I have already stated I think it's a bad thing outside of a minority of businesses that have a clear need for flexibility.

getmore4less

Many xero hours are realy recuring casual contracts.


For a zero hours to work it should have a few basic rules that should apply to real contracts as well.

Only contracted hours should be compulsory.

Contracted hours should be known in advance.

Non contracted hours should be by mutual agreement.

So a Zero hours you are not on call, they ask and you get a choice
(thats the way the NHS works them for my OH)

Don't agree to anything else.

Restrictions on other work are allready covered, they cannot be reasonably refused so the terms would be unenforceble with no contracted hours.

one advantage of zero hours over small fixed hours is all hours worked qualify for holidays.

So you should be able toclaim JSA, you are available for other work. you would be mad not to be looking if they were not paying enough to make the JSA claim zero

Chances are if you don't play the game with those that want you to you get zero hours so plenty of time to look for other work..

bugslet

kabayiri wrote: »

Some bloke called "John" on Radio 5 was on an hour or so ago (sorry...that's as accurate as my name recollection gets!).

Jon Moynihan? Chairman of PA Consulting group. He had an article in yesterday's Times quoting those figures. Sorry can't link, it's a paysite.

N1AK

MacMickster wrote: »

Surely this will be the problem for an employer with zero hours contracts.

Most employers value the knowledge, commitment and reliability of good employees. I doubt that zero hours contracts actually benefit many in the long run.

It will be a problem for some and 0-hour contracts are almost certainly not appropriate for every role and every company. I don't manage our transport team so I can't give a definitive answer but I'm confident that 0-hour staff have helped us control costs and remain flexible.

A 0-hour contract driver is almost exactly like using an agency. You check if they are available when you need them and avoid the fees an agency would charge. Because we keep a number of 0-hour drivers on our books the turnover rarely leaves us short and some of the best are picked up as permanent staff (again without having to pay the considerable fee you would pay an agency to take one of their staff permanent). If we come up short for 0-hour staff we call agencies to top up our staff.

Obviously if the skills you need are very rare, or you need a consistently high base level of quality then this kind of arrangement wouldn't be appropriate.

However all that would happen if we didn't use 0-hour staff is that we would employ agency staff instead (who still aren't guaranteed any work) and pay more in fees. The drivers themselves would end up worse off.

If you made it illegal for agencies to employ people on flexible contracts then we'd have to consider whether we bring on more permanent staff (increasing cost) or stop doing some of the work that drives the variation in demand (removing the need for 0-hour staff and dropping our productivity/profit & tax).

Yorkie1

The issue which was mentioned at the start of this thread, but seems to have got lost along the way, is that some 0-hour contracts prevent individuals working elsewhere under any circumstances.

That, to my mind, is the aspect which is least appealing and least easy to sustain.

Someone is waiting around for last-minute text messages, and is unable either to claim JSA or to take work elsewhere if there are no calls. How on earth can most people afford to live on that basis?

ash28

Yorkie1 wrote: »

The issue which was mentioned at the start of this thread, but seems to have got lost along the way, is that some 0-hour contracts prevent individuals working elsewhere under any circumstances.

That, to my mind, is the aspect which is least appealing and least easy to sustain.

Someone is waiting around for last-minute text messages, and is unable either to claim JSA or to take work elsewhere if there are no calls. How on earth can most people afford to live on that basis?

They can't afford to live on that basis.

I know someone working retail who has a zero hours contract and after a few weeks of only 4 hours work a week decided they would get an additional job with a different retailer - but weren't allowed to have another job - due to company confidentiality.

I think some people get mixed up with casual workers - these aren't casual workers. They are employees. If firms want a casual workforce then they should employ casuals or agency temps.

Loughton_Monkey

How the hell do OECD measure this properly?

I have one piece of legislation embracing all the circumstances of dismissal - performance, age, behaviour, redundancy, pregnancy, ...... You, on the other hand, have seperate laws on performance measurement, age, sex issues, pregnancy etc. Would you be measured as providing more 'protection'?

Another thing is the enforcement. I recall my 4 years in SOuth Korea. They have clear legislation that bans sexual discrimination in employment. However, my own company had published regulations that allowed men to be promoted 4 years after joining, while women had to wait 7 years. In addition, when I joined, there were in the order of 300 employees at management level. They were all male. I took great pride in promoting the first female to management.

Existence of legislation is no real measure.

olly300

N1AK wrote: »

It will be a problem for some and 0-hour contracts are almost certainly not appropriate for every role and every company. I don't manage our transport team so I can't give a definitive answer but I'm confident that 0-hour staff have helped us control costs and remain flexible.

Those aren't actually 0 hour contracts as I know nurses and supply teacher who worked like that i.e. they had a choice whether to work.

The people in retail, restaurant and hospitality industries don't have that choice they have to turn up when called or texted.

I first heard of 0 hours contracts in the mid-nineties.

A large well-known retailer did a presentation on them and the manager thought they were a wonderful idea. I was horrified as I couldn't think of a reason why anyone would work like that i.e. being rung up and having to drop everything to turn up to work with no choice because the rota manager couldn't get the staffing levels right. *

Even though unemployment was high and I knew people who were looking for work the jobs where advertised in the local newspapers for over a year.

Good businesses try and ensure their staff have some sort of loyalty to them it helps stop staff doing things like stealing from the business.

This includes giving as you described people the choice to work that day, giving people like students who work a set number of hours a week a chance to work more hours or - in the case of some of the small businesses I know - using family, friends and even ex-employees.

*Unavoidable sickness is treated differently and yes I've been rung up to come in early when I worked in retail.