Use of zero hour contracts "surges"

purch

I am sure there are a huge number of Zero Hour jobs that work very well for those on the contracts, and probably as many that are the opposite.

It will all depend on circumstances, need and ultimately the work life balance and total earnings people may want.

Yes, the employment market is vastly different to how it was in the 1950's, but then again so are most things.

Times change, and those who are successful are the ones who adapt and take on the challenge and the opportunity.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

How do you get a mortgage or a rental on those kinds of contracts?

I can see how such flexibility suits students and housewives, but not practical for most surely?

Generali

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

How do you get a mortgage or a rental on those kinds of contracts?

I can see how such flexibility suits students and housewives, but not practical for most surely?

As 2/3rds of people on zero hours contracts are happy with their lot I would guess that most people on zero hours contracts are students or housewives.

I would imagine that for the remaining third, the majority are using it to fill in whilst waiting for something better to turn up.

CLAPTON

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

How do you get a mortgage or a rental on those kinds of contracts?

I can see how such flexibility suits students and housewives, but not practical for most surely?

that is indeed a problem

one shared with the unemployed and the self employed;

maybe that suggests a way forward

purch

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

How do you get a mortgage or a rental on those kinds of contracts?

Everyone will need to adapt as things change.

If you don't move with the times you get left behind.

Pennywise

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Hehe. It was "excellent news" when it was just 0.5% of the working population

In any case, you assume that these jobs never existed befoe zero hour contracts. Which would beg the question, who carried out these duties in shops before zero hour contracts exploded?

It's quite some stretch of the imagination to assume that if zero hour contracts were curtailed, the need for workers would simply cease and therefore the duties they carry out would somehow be fulfilled without the labour.

Simple. Employers can take on staff as and when they need them. The alternative is simply that employers wouldn't take on the extra staff at all and muddle through with fewer bodies or do less sales. I agree that there may be an exploitative element in the larger businesses, but small/micro businesses are able to expand because of zero hour contracts. Your average corner shop, tiny cafe, tradesman, etc., typically can't take on a full timer because it's just too much of a hit to the cash flow and the work simply isn't there. Zero-hours contracts are a godsend to them so that they can have a small pool of workers able to come in for just a few hours here and there - you know, the kind of work that children, housewives and early retirees are looking for work. Small tradesmen in particular need flexible labour, otherwise they simply can't grow and are left languishing as a one-man band. The elephant in the room is the employment rights which have gone too far - now small businesses are scared stiff of unfair dismissal claims, mat/pat leave, etc., so do what they can to avoid these kind of liabilities.

Jennifer_Jane

All through my working life (45 years), I have been, at times, on "zero contracts". In general it worked fine to bring in money in between permanent jobs. We were called "temps". We could be told to go somewhere and then turned around and told we weren't needed when we got there. In general, however, there was some protection from the Agency staff. So I do understand the general difference between "Zero contracts" and "temps", but there wasn't a huge difference. It usually led to a permanent job, and in my last work, it was unofficially agreed that a temp job might lead to a contract, then after a couple of years to a permanent job. In the meantime you got to know the Company, and they got to know you.


If it is helping companies become successful during the hard times, then, as things get better, employees will have more choices and can lay down the law a bit.


As for how employees think about this, I have a current anecdote: a friend is coming up for 61 and has been unemployed for almost a year. He now has two casual jobs working for the same company, and is being treated fairly well. This has given him interest, pride (both in himself and the Company), is showing the company that he is keen and can do the job, extra money, is showing the Job Centre that he is keen to work, keeping him fit, showing potential other employers that this company wanted him for two casual jobs. It also reduces his benefits somewhat.


All this will help him both physically and mentally, to live his life, as opposed to sitting on the sofa endlessly applying for jobs which he never hears back from (obviously he still does this).


As the economy improves, I assume that his chances of a permanent job will do too.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Hehe. It was "excellent news" when it was just 0.5% of the working population

The ONS advise caution in making the assumption that there has been a massive rise in zero hours contracts based on this release.

In response to media reports about "official figures" showing a steep increase in the number of zero-hours employment contracts, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) urges users to treat the latest estimate with due caution pending the forthcoming publication of more reliable figures.

In response to an ad hoc query in February, ONS published a figure for the number of employees on zero hours contracts for October-December 2013 from the Labour Force Survey:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/about-ons/business-transparency/freedom-of-information/what-can-i-request/published-ad-hoc-data/labour/february-2014/zero-hours-analysis.xls

This shows a substantial increase on the same time a year earlier. However, ONS recognises that this question depends on employees correctly knowing their terms of employment, and that increased awareness of ZHCs among employees may have affected how people respond following increased media coverage in the latter half of 2013.

ONS believes employers are best placed to provide accurate information about the employment terms of their workforce, and therefore in summer 2013 took steps promptly to begin collecting these data in order to produce better statistics on this important issue:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/mro/news-release/ons-announces-additional-estimate-of-zero-hours-contracts/zhc0813.html

Our first employer-based estimates of ZHCs are expected in April 2014.

Simply put many employees won't have realised they're on zero hours contracts until recent media coverage which may have affected their survey response.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The use of such contracts has risen 545% in the last decade, with the majority of that increase coming from the years 2012/14.

When did zero hours contracts first enter common vocabulary?

mayonnaise

purch wrote: »

Times change, and those who are successful are the ones who adapt and take on the challenge and the opportunity.

Hear! Hear!

And to tie in with the other Devon whinge thread, the UK still is a country for young men. For young men who adapt, get a good education, who grasp opportunities and put in some effort. And that is....good.

danothy

I'm sure I've asked before, but I'll ask again ... People on zero hour contracts, they do usually work more than zero hours, don't they? It seems like it'd be somewhat pointless not to for both employer and employee.