Zero hours contract, but no shifts for two weeks........

MisterMan_2

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

Not deluded in the slightest, work a zero hour contract for the work you can get and then move onto a full time contract when possible. Plenty of people will have done it...does that make them deluded for trying and succeeding?

Is this advice born from personal experience?

Southend1

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

Not deluded in the slightest, work a zero hour contract for the work you can get and then move onto a full time contract when possible. Plenty of people will have done it...does that make them deluded for trying and succeeding?

And in the mean time?

Worry constantly about where the money is coming from to pay the rent, the electricity bill, the food shop? Whether the kids will have the right school uniform in time for September?

And what if that full time contract never comes up? The last place I worked had about 12 full time staff out of a workforce of over 150.

This is the 21st century, it's not right that people should be faced with such worries on a daily basis.

Pont

Read this thread with interest.

I was on a zero hours contract for 8 years working the same hours every week as any other full-time employee. However, I was the only employee suitably qualified and experienced in the area to do the job.

Should I have questioned my contract - yes. Did I, no. Why because I was scared of not getting any work. When I eventually questioned my status my department was 're-structured' and guess who wasn't given any more work?

Local authority (education) btw.

Pont

Southend1 wrote: »

And in the mean time?

Worry constantly about where the money is coming from to pay the rent, the electricity bill, the food shop? Whether the kids will have the right school uniform in time for September?

And what if that full time contract never comes up? The last place I worked had about 12 full time staff out of a workforce of over 150.

This is the 21st century, it's not right that people should be faced with such worries on a daily basis.

Absolutely - I totally echo this post.

Pont

MisterMan wrote: »

I think it's the undesirable jobs that are offering these contracts, rather than people using it to hold onto their dream job as a CEO, surgeon, solicitor etc...

One of the people I know on one of these contracts is currently employed as a cleaner, and I imagine most of the people employed by Sports Direct on a zero hours contract probably would rather something better than retail.

I was a teacher on a zero hours contract. You'd be surprised how many professional, degreed people also work under the terms of these so called 'contracts'.

Takeaway_Addict

Pont wrote: »

Read this thread with interest.

I was on a zero hours contract for 8 years working the same hours every week as any other full-time employee. However, I was the only employee suitably qualified and experienced in the area to do the job.

Should I have questioned my contract - yes. Did I, no. Why because I was scared of not getting any work. When I eventually questioned my status my department was 're-structured' and guess who wasn't given any more work?

Local authority (education) btw.

Interesting but did you look for a more job with set contracted hours for all those 8 years or did you just sit back for a period of time contented?

Takeaway_Addict

MisterMan wrote: »

Is this advice born from personal experience?

No, but you can't tell me it doesn't happen frequently?

I'll bow out of this thread now as I have said my side of things and we won't change each others opinion.

Pont

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

Interesting but did you look for a more job with set contracted hours for all those 8 years or did you just sit back for a period of time contented?

I certainly did look for alternatives during this time (on the quiet). However, it was always inferred that:-
a) If I took work elsewhere it was the case of don't expect any work from us in the future.
b) A full-time, permanent contract was imminent.
c) Poor kids will fail their exams if you leave!

Surely when somebody is working full-time hours for a lengthy period of time, a zero hours contract is not appropriate (if indeed it ever is?).

Never contented.

MisterMan_2

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

No, but you can't tell me it doesn't happen frequently?

I'll bow out of this thread now as I have said my side of things and we won't change each others opinion.

Mine's not opinion, it's supported by evidence. You seem to have pulled some thoughts out of the air, and refuse to change/believe they're wrong despite people telling you they have first hand experience which suggests otherwise.

catwoman73

Pont, that's terrible. So did your job just 'end' by them not giving you any more hours?

Sounds like a way of getting out of redundancy pay as well - if you had been on a proper contract, you would have been entitled to redundancy if they let you go after 8 years, but it seems that you wouldn't have been entitled

IMHO zero hours contracts should be severely restricted as it is clear that employers are abusing them unfairly, just like they used to do with constantly renewing temporary contracts - short term contracts were automatically renewed, but the employee never got any permanent employee rights or benefits. They were then banned in that (I think) if a contract was renewed for a second time, the whole employment period was considered to be permanent and the employee had to have the same rights as permanent employees.

Its time that the same treatment is given to zero hours contracts - after a qualifying period, your average time worked per week over the past X weeks/months should give you rights based on 'implied hours' eg if you have averaged 20 hours per week over the past 3 months you should then have a right to be offered and paid for at least 20 hours per week.