Zero hour contracts

[pap]

Imagine a job where you have no contracted hours! Sounds delish on first glance, but in reality, it's a short-cut to not having any stability or rights.

 

This story hit the news earlier in the week, with Sports Direct in the firing line. According to this article in the Guardian, even Buckingham Palace is at it:-

 

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/jul/30/buckingham-palace-zero-hours-contracts

 

Implications of zero hour contracts, lifted from the article.

 

the contracts leave staff without guaranteed hours, sick pay or holiday pay, and make it difficult to get a tenancy agreement, credit card or loan because proving regular income becomes impossible.

[Barry Sanchez]

A disgrace, no Union activity in these places either, Amazon is the leading player in this work model.

[Tokyo-Saint]

Take it or leave it Baz. That is the job on offer, if you don't want it, some price pikey like bearsy will come along and take it.

[Kingsland Red]

Welcome to the world of the self employed.

As a consultant I have work when clients employ me / my practice.

Most small businesses are run like this.

(It is also very lucrative when a roll out contract is signed !)

[Sour Mash]

A disgrace, no Union activity in these places either, Amazon is the leading player in this work model.

Why is it a disgrace?

[Minty]

Welcome to the world of the self employed.

As a consultant I have work when clients employ me / my practice.

Most small businesses are run like this.

(It is also very lucrative when a roll out contract is signed !)

It's not quite the same. Being self-employed, taking on a contract, is like getting a temporary employment contract but for a fixed number of hours. You know the hours you are going to have to work and for what duration, to get the work done.

 

Zero hours would be like you getting a contract with a client, who says: "I will have some work for you, I just don't know when it'll need doing or how much there will be... I just need you ready to do it when I say... sign here!"

 

You wouldn't sign that contract.

[pap]

Welcome to the world of the self employed.

As a consultant I have work when clients employ me / my practice.

Most small businesses are run like this.

(It is also very lucrative when a roll out contract is signed !)

 

I'm already in the world of the self-employed. I weigh up the potential rewards against the sacrifice of my rights. For me, the calculation is a no-brainer. I'd expect some rights if I was working for a firm.

[Sour Mash]

It's not quite the same. Being self-employed, taking on a contract, is like getting a temporary employment contract but for a fixed number of hours. You know the hours you are going to have to work and for what duration, to get the work done.

 

Zero hours would be like you getting a contract with a client, who says: "I will have some work for you, I just don't know when it'll need doing or how much there will be... I just need you ready to do it when I say... sign here!"

 

You wouldn't sign that contract.

You may well sign that contract depending on what the market was like, what else you had on, rates being offered etc. The whole point is, sometimes you have to take the few opportunities that are available.

[View From The Top]

Organisation I've just left had introduced them at Xmas. The SMT thought themselves very clever coming up with the ploy, until we actually needed them and they'd all gone and gotten jobs elsewhere. Caused an absolute nightmare which I enjoyed watching immensely as I'd opposed them vehemently to begin with.

[Tokyo-Saint]

Exactly. It is a job opportunity, an offer. You can moan about the offer, just take it or don't take it. Either it is a reasonable offer and the company will find people or as VFTT says, the company might come unstuck and change the offer back.

[bridge too far]

Zer hours contracts particularly mitigate against people who have caring responsibilities. A working parent, for example, has to contract with a nursery / child carer to provide x hours / days a week. If that parent doesn't know with any certainty that they'll actually be called upon to work, they could well find it uneconomic to work such a contract.

 

As others have said, it's different if you're self-employed (and I have been so I do understand). If you've got an ounce of business sense, you'd factor in your holidays when working out the rates you charge for the work you do. My SiL has a very successful graphic design company. He works very long hours and has been courted by other companies to work for them. He'd

rather have the flexibility of being self-employed as it means he can, for example, undertake some child care when necessary and make up the lost time in the evenings and / or weekends.

 

It's a sad indictment of our society that we expect people to be available 24/7 without offering them basic rights such as sick pay and holiday pay and some certainty of income.

[moonraker]

It is a latter day version of the Dock Labour Scheme something most Sotonians should know was a disgraceful exploitation of the workforce.

[Viking Warrior]

Sorry this is a non story. thypical guardian reporter trying to drive a wedge between the employers , the workers and the unions or whoever

 

These types of contracts are used up and down the country and used a lot in the public sector . So they can cover sickmess etc at short notice in places like school support staff, and social services.

 

Normally referred to as casual or relief contracts. The are based on the concept of mutal obligation. I.e there is no mutial obligation to offer some one work but where work is offered the employee is not obliged to accept the work on offer.So it benefits lots ofpeople even thse who are in partime work etc.

 

It is not an explitation. They may well be seasonal staff. Its the wording in the contract that is important.

[bridge too far]

Viking - there's a difference between 'relief' contracts as you put it and having 20,000 part-time employees on zero hours.

[Tokyo-Saint]

This isn't a new thing. When I was younger/student and working shit jobs, I was on a 0 hours contract. It was bad, split shifts, no sick pay etc but it was a **** job, so I put up with it long enough until I got a better offer. I guess everyone will do the same.

[bridge too far]

If people are on JSA and they turn down a zero hours contract, would their benefits be stopped? I'm just wondering what rights people have in such a situation.

[Kingsland Red]

It's not quite the same. Being self-employed, taking on a contract, is like getting a temporary employment contract but for a fixed number of hours. You know the hours you are going to have to work and for what duration, to get the work done.

 

Zero hours would be like you getting a contract with a client, who says: "I will have some work for you, I just don't know when it'll need doing or how much there will be... I just need you ready to do it when I say... sign here!"

 

You wouldn't sign that contract.

 

I didn't explain being a 'self employed' consultant very well.

As an Architect with my own practice I work from my office with as many contracts as I can secure, and manage the time as best I can,employing people to assist as necessary. Many of these contracts have an undetermined start date and stall to suit outside influences. Exactly as your second paragraph.

[Big Bad Bob]

This isn't a new thing. When I was younger/student and working shit jobs, I was on a 0 hours contract. It was bad, split shifts, no sick pay etc but it was a **** job, so I put up with it long enough until I got a better offer. I guess everyone will do the same.

 

Exactly, when I was in 6th form I worked for Safeway (*THAT* long ago!!) where I was contracted for 4.25 hours a week, basically a Saturday job and not zero hours, however they had me working at least 12 hours a week and full time in the summer.

 

I took a weeks holiday and got 4.25 hours pay, so not fair..

[Minty]

I didn't explain being a 'self employed' consultant very well.

As an Architect with my own practice I work from my office with as many contracts as I can secure, and manage the time as best I can,employing people to assist as necessary. Many of these contracts have an undetermined start date and stall to suit outside influences. Exactly as your second paragraph.

Fair enough - but I think we are still talking about significantly different situations... these contracts are being used by and large for unskilled, casual labour, and the employer tends to not care much about who that person is, just that they can do a simple, unskilled job. Your clients want to use you, hence have entered into a contract with you, because they value your work, your portfolio and probably other specific architecture-type stuff!

 

With many zero hours contracts, especially those highlighted where a large % of the workforce are on them, as opposed to just a few people, I believe companies are effectively exploiting people who want work, need work, and feel that any contract, even a zero hours one, is 'better than nothing' in the search for meaningful employment. Others are right - there are times and places where a mutually agreed zero hours contract is fine and fits both the employee and the employer, but there are other situations where they are being used for more selfish corporate reasons IMO.

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

I didn't explain being a 'self employed' consultant very well.

As an Architect with my own practice I work from my office with as many contracts as I can secure, and manage the time as best I can,employing people to assist as necessary. Many of these contracts have an undetermined start date and stall to suit outside influences. Exactly as your second paragraph.

 

Come off it. Being on a low-paid zero hours contract is nothing like being self-employed.

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

Exactly, when I was in 6th form I worked for Safeway (*THAT* long ago!!) where I was contracted for 4.25 hours a week, basically a Saturday job and not zero hours, however they had me working at least 12 hours a week and full time in the summer.

 

I took a weeks holiday and got 4.25 hours pay, so not fair..

 

And was everyone else at Safeway on such flimsy terms? I'm sure it was fine for you being a teenager and living with your mum and dad, would you have enjoyed that situation if you had rent to pay and dependents to feed at home?

[Barry Sanchez]

Why is it a disgrace?

 

Because it does not offer a guaranteed working week, its creates uncertainty to plan for the future.

[Barry Sanchez]

Funny how the capitalists on here who welcome all into this Country screw their own over. Wouldn't want to be in the trenches with you guys........................

[Barry Sanchez]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/14/hello-zero-hours-goodbye-workers-rights

 

 

Seeing as most are quick to quote the Manchester Guardian on here, here is one back. Thatchers children with no principles.

[Barry Sanchez]

This isn't a new thing. When I was younger/student and working shit jobs, I was on a 0 hours contract. It was bad, split shifts, no sick pay etc but it was a **** job, so I put up with it long enough until I got a better offer. I guess everyone will do the same.

 

http://www.mhpbooks.com/amazon-warehouses-literally-worse-than-coal-mines/

[Barry Sanchez]

Come off it. Being on a low-paid zero hours contract is nothing like being self-employed.

 

Or being an architect with skills as opposed to a person without such. Lopsided and selfish argument.

[Tokyo-Saint]

Funny how the capitalists on here who welcome all into this Country screw their own over. Wouldn't want to be in the trenches with you guys........................

 

God imagine being in the trenches with you! You would moan me over the top.

[Sour Mash]

Because it does not offer a guaranteed working week, its creates uncertainty to plan for the future.

So what would be better; a contract with zero hours, that will at least offer some work and pay or no contract at all?

[Barry Sanchez]

So what would be better; a contract with zero hours, that will at least offer some work and pay or no contract at all?

A job thats offers dignity, security and opportunity would be the wisest way to go, you appear to advocate exploitation.

[Sour Mash]

And was everyone else at Safeway on such flimsy terms? I'm sure it was fine for you being a teenager and living with your mum and dad, would you have enjoyed that situation if you had rent to pay and dependents to feed at home?

It's not about "enjoying the situation" is it? It's of case of making the most of any work that is available.

[Batman]

A job thats offers dignity, security and opportunity would be the wisest way to go, you appear to advocate exploitation.

 

LOL. go dune

[Barry Sanchez]

It's not about "enjoying the situation" is it? It's of case of making the most of any work that is available.

Doing a job to get by is one thing but doing it for 45 years on/off at the beck and call of the employer is draconian and Victorian, well done boys.

[Minty]

So what would be better; a contract with zero hours, that will at least offer some work and pay or no contract at all?

Those needn't be the choices. Decent companies know that staff productivity increases in line with staff engagement and morale. Rather than looking at the short term bottom-line, companies should be planning more long term and creating jobs accordingly - it will usually actually be financially better for them to do so, but requires a bit of long term thinking, which many aren't capable of.

 

It's a bit like austerity measures... short-term cost cutting is actually worse in the long term too IMO.

[saintfully]

Must be a particularly sh.ite company if they don't know what their labour costs/requirements are going to be (broadly) from day to day. Mickey-mouse outfit.

[Tokyo-Saint]

Some are, some aren't minty. If someone gets some good experience working at a **** sports shop, keeps regular attendance/time keeping, works hard, after 6 months to a year, they can go on and get a job at a better shop that offer better terms. This is the loss of the sports shop as they then have to recruit but it is up to them to weigh up the recruitment cost against the advantage of a flexible workforce. It is the gain of the better shop as they get to hire experienced reliable people.

 

The sports shop are taking a gamble. The only people that would take a 0 hours contract are those with no experience and/or bad references. People aren't going to be leaving John Lewis to go and work for them are they? As they are taking the gamble, they want to minimise it, by not guaranteeing set hours. In my experience, these places are always understaffed (high staff turnover), if you are any good/hard working you can pick up as many hours as you want and often more than you want.

[Whitey Grandad]

Must be a particularly sh.ite company if they don't know what their labour costs/requirements are going to be (broadly) from day to day. Mickey-mouse outfit.

 

Not at all. It all depends on demand. There are plenty of businesses in this situation. How about the Fire Service?

[Minty]

Not at all. It all depends on demand. There are plenty of businesses in this situation. How about the Fire Service?

 

Demand may account for a small % of workforce flexibility, but not the majority... that was the point that was made earlier. This wouldn't be the issue it is if it were only a small % of a workforce, but in some places it is a large proportion. 20,000 at Sports Direct, 'all of Cineworlds part-time employees'... those are the major issues.

 

I'm not quite sure how the Fire Service are a relevant example either, but happy to hear more as to why you think so...?

Edited 31 July, 2013 by Minty

[Kingsland Red]

Or being an architect with skills as opposed to a person without such. Lopsided and selfish argument.

 

A skill is only of use if another party wants to utilise it, and on favourable terms. That is the way supply and demand works in a free market economy.

Nobody pays something for nothing , regardless of what 'skill' is put before them.

[skintsaint]

 

the contracts leave staff without guaranteed hours, sick pay or holiday pay, and make it difficult to get a tenancy agreement, credit card or loan because proving regular income becomes impossible.

 

Sounds like the casual contract I am on..?...whats new about this?

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

Sounds like the casual contract I am on..?...whats new about this?

 

The mass use of it by supposedly respectable organisations. Its fine to manage fluctuations in workload but not fine if it turns into outright exploitation.

[Barry Sanchez]

Some are, some aren't minty. If someone gets some good experience working at a **** sports shop, keeps regular attendance/time keeping, works hard, after 6 months to a year, they can go on and get a job at a better shop that offer better terms. This is the loss of the sports shop as they then have to recruit but it is up to them to weigh up the recruitment cost against the advantage of a flexible workforce. It is the gain of the better shop as they get to hire experienced reliable people.

 

The sports shop are taking a gamble. The only people that would take a 0 hours contract are those with no experience and/or bad references. People aren't going to be leaving John Lewis to go and work for them are they? As they are taking the gamble, they want to minimise it, by not guaranteeing set hours. In my experience, these places are always understaffed (high staff turnover), if you are any good/hard working you can pick up as many hours as you want and often more than you want.

 

Thats no guarantee though is it?

[Tokyo-Saint]

Not if you yourself are shit baz, no. There are no guarantees in life are there?

[Barry Sanchez]

Not if you yourself are shit baz, no. There are no guarantees in life are there?

 

 

There should be a guarantee if you secure employment you will receive guaranteed and assured hours at the rate thats fair for both worker and employer.

This is simply exploitation and offering no assurances to staff to plan for the future.

[Batman]

have to love dunes attempts and hiding his real views

at least I gave up after a few days lol

[Tokyo-Saint]

So then don't take the job. Or take the job until you get some experience on your CV and then move on to a better job. Or stay at home and continue to watch Jeremy Kyle all day and have an even larger gap on your CV.

 

Don't moan about someone making an offer. If you don't like the offer don't take it.

[Sheaf Saint]

I understand the situations where zero hour contracts are necessary. My partner for example works in community support with mental health patients, and is on a zero-hr contract. It makes perfect sense because her organisation really do not know when or for how long her services are required each week. The good thing is, in her case anyway, that if a service-user cancels the appointment with her at short notice, she still gets paid for however many hours it was agreed she would have been working with them.

 

In such cases, I have no objection to such contracts as they are nothing new and tend to benefit both parties. However, where you have a company like Sports Direct essentially getting their entire workforce on 0-hr contracts, knowing full well that most of them will be doing full time hours anyway, it's just a cynical and sh*tty way of getting cheap labour and not offering the rights and benefits that full-time employees are supposed to receive.

[Viking Warrior]

AS I have a bit more time I will try to explain zero hours contracts, As I said earlier the key area to focus on is the nature and content of the contract in place between employee and employer

Zero hours and Casual Contracts are very similar the employee undertakes to be available for work at the employer's request, but will only be paid only for work done.

 

From this type of contract the employee gains continuity of employment and can claim unfair dismissal after one year (or two years if his or her employment begins on or after 6 April 2012)

They could also be entitled to any redundancy pay after two years service based on hours they have been employed as

 

Casual contractors are slightly different and are engaged purely on an ad hoc basis, and there is no continuing employment relationship between engagements. (No Mutual obligation to provide or accept work Thus, most casuals do not gain continuity of employment. Back to the contarctv the employer should make it clear if there is a continuing employment relationship between periods of actual work, or whether there is a series of separate contracts

 

In respect of casual workers. if they are to be used continually for 6 or 8 weeks . dependant on the employer, then an employer should be issuing a temporary contract if the employee is covering for something like long term sickness etc, This will allow for continuity of service etc be accrued , There have been a number of abuses using casual contracts mainly in the areas such as care or cleaning in private companies.

 

Sorry Bridge for not explaining more clearly in my earlier post . each contract will be different and it would be wrong for the media to assume that ZERO contracts are identical up and down the country . They are not

 

The basic clause in a zero hours contract will normal have the fol;lowing wording

 

The organisation's need for individuals to perform work varies from time to time. You agree to be available for work, should the organisation decide to offer you work. However, the organisation has no obligation to offer you work at any time, and you are not entitled to a minimum number of hours of work per day, week or year.

 

If X does offer you work, (the “assignment”), you are required to accept and complete it to the organisation's satisfaction. Where the organisation offers an assignment to you, it does not give rise to a presumption that it will offer you further assignments.

 

Your hours of work for each assignment will be determined by the organisation in advance of the assignment and set out in a written schedule.

 

While the key for casual is as follows, and the following is the one I devised a few years ago

 

I am pleased to confirm the offer of casual work as and when required.

 

Should you accept this offer, you must understand that if appropriate work is available it may be offered to you, although xxx is under no obligation to do so, equally you are under no obligation to accept any offer of work.

 

1. Type of Work

 

You will provide your services as . You will not be an employee of XXXXX and at no time will there be any mutuality of obligation between you and the XXXX You may be offered work by the XXXXl at its discretion, but there will be no obligation on the XXXX to offer work or for you to accept it on any particular occasion.

Edited 31 July, 2013 by Viking Warrior

[Barry Sanchez]

have to love dunes attempts and hiding his real views

at least I gave up after a few days lol

 

I have been a member of the Labour party for 20 years and in a Union for the same time, dune is not me, surely the admins can see that from my email?

[Batman]

I have been a member of the Labour party for 20 years and in a Union for the same time, dune is not me, surely the admins can see that from my email?

 

[Barry Sanchez]

AS I have a bit more time I will try to explain zero hours contracts, As I said earlier the key area to focus on is the nature and content of the contract in place between employee and employer

Zero hours and Casual Contracts are very similar the employee undertakes to be available for work at the employer's request, but will only be paid only for work done.

 

From this type of contract the employee gains continuity of employment and can claim unfair dismissal after one year (or two years if his or her employment begins on or after 6 April 2012)

They could also be entitled to any redundancy pay after two years service based on hours they have been employed as

 

Casual contractors are slightly different and are engaged purely on an ad hoc basis, and there is no continuing employment relationship between engagements. (No Mutual obligation to provide or accept work Thus, most casuals do not gain continuity of employment. Back to the contarctv the employer should make it clear if there is a continuing employment relationship between periods of actual work, or whether there is a series of separate contracts

 

In respect of casual workers. if they are to be used continually for 6 or 8 weeks . dependant on the employer, then a could employer should be issuing a temporary contract if the employee is covering for something like long term sickness etc, This will allow for continuity of service eto be accrued , There have been a number of abuses using casual contracts mainly in the areas such as care or cleaning in private companies.

 

Sorry Bridge for not explaining more clearly in my earlier post . each contract will be different and it would be wrong for the media to assume that ZERO contracts are identical up and down the country . They are not

 

The basic clause in a zero hours contract will normal have the fol;lowing wording

 

The organisation's need for individuals to perform work varies from time to time. You agree to be available for work, should the organisation decide to offer you work. However, the organisation has no obligation to offer you work at any time, and you are not entitled to a minimum number of hours of work per day, week or year.

 

If X does offer you work, (the “assignment”), you are required to accept and complete it to the organisation's satisfaction. Where the organisation offers an assignment to you, it does not give rise to a presumption that it will offer you further assignments.

 

Your hours of work for each assignment will be determined by the organisation in advance of the assignment and set out in a written schedule.

 

While the key for casual is as follows, and the following is the one I devised a few years ago

 

I am pleased to confirm the offer of casual work as and when required.

 

Should you accept this offer, you must understand that if appropriate work is available it may be offered to you, although xxx is under no obligation to do so, equally you are under no obligation to accept any offer of work.

 

1. Type of Work

 

You will provide your services as . You will not be an employee of XXXXX and at no time will there be any mutuality of obligation between you and the XXXX You may be offered work by the XXXXl at its discretion, but there will be no obligation on the XXXX to offer work or for you to accept it on any particular occasion.

 

 

In short similar to turning up at the docks in the 30's and seeing if your turn came.