Reduction in hours

theoretica

If that is all it takes to impose a reduction in hours it rather makes a mockery of employee rights. Employers who have staff with more than two years service they want to get rid of who had the forethought to add that to the contract could then just reduce the hours without messing around with redundancy. So this seems to me to be close to asking you to sign away your contractual rights. Doesn't seem right to me. How long have you been employed there?

sangie595

I think what is missing - apart from the entire contract and any knowledge of employment status- is the fact that the contract had been changed before. So the quoted sections are, in fact, less than currently worked anyway. So what the contract might say is superseded anyway. And they are sections - I suspect that there's more to this.

Which is why the default position is that the employer is doing this. There is some evidence to suggest they can. There needs to be evidence that they can't- and they're isn't enough information here to say that. Right now, this actually might in fact be a zero hours contract. We can't tell...

TELLIT01

Fergie76 wrote: »

I would say it's all down to the interpretation of the terminology.

So OP has said their contract says, 0800-1600 Tuesday Thursday & Friday, to me a change would be say, 1200-2000 Sat, Sun, Mon.

Less hours is a reduction and their contract does not say it can reduce their hours only change them.

Clearly so, as I had interpreted 'change' as either moving days/hours worked e.g. Tuesday instead of Wednesday, 9 -5 instead of 8-4 OR number of days and/or number of hours. Who knows how it would be interpreted by an employment tribunal, not that I'm suggesting taking that route. I just mean the legal eagles would have fun and make a fortune working that one out.

sangie595

TELLIT01 wrote: »

Clearly so, as I had interpreted 'change' as either moving days/hours worked e.g. Tuesday instead of Wednesday, 9 -5 instead of 8-4 OR number of days and/or number of hours. Who knows how it would be interpreted by an employment tribunal, not that I'm suggesting taking that route. I just mean the legal eagles would have fun and make a fortune working that one out.

Possibly. But actually all we know is that the original contract had a box that said something about days and times. That isn't much to go on - a historical document that might say something. I have a box that says "gold bullion", but when I open it I am constantly disappointed!

The OP has a "contract" of some sort (we don't know) that says something about three days (but they are working four) and we don't know what it says! It might say "you are on a zero hours contract and we will try to give you hours on these days but that is subject to change".

Cheeky_Monkey

Toooldforthisagain wrote: »

Yes it is but it doesn't say anything about reduction

A change is a change, it doesn't have to be specific. It simply means a change to your working week.

I bet you didn't complain when they 'changed' your number of days from 3 to 4. Your contract doesn't specifically say 'increase' either but you obviously considered that an 'acceptable change'.

I don't think you can have it both ways.

Me2you

Let’s all have “changes to our contract” so the employ can reduce our hours every week....

theoretica

Cheeky_Monkey wrote: »

A change is a change, it doesn't have to be specific. It simply means a change to your working week.

I bet you didn't complain when they 'changed' your number of days from 3 to 4. Your contract doesn't specifically say 'increase' either but you obviously considered that an 'acceptable change'.

I don't think you can have it both ways.

My initial contract had my salary in it - this has increased since, and I didn't complain. I certainly would if they reduced it. Wouldn't you?

takman

theoretica wrote: »

My initial contract had my salary in it - this has increased since, and I didn't complain. I certainly would if they reduced it. Wouldn't you?

I bet your contract doesn't state your initial salary then have the wording "However your salary can be changed at anytime", if it does then you should never have agreed to it