Salaried Position but Zero Hour Contract?

[Martynt74]

My stepson has been offered a new job and asked me to look at the contract. I'm a bit confused as it's a salaried position yet also states zero hours contract which seems a bit odd.



There's the extract. I'm not sure how normal this is and initially my only concern is whether he could end up being on less that NMW depending on hours worked given the relatively low salary.

 

[Maccapacca]

Sign it don't turn up profit

 

[Martynt74]

Haha that was my initial thoughts

 

[UnworthyBean]

Is either supposed to be pro rata or is written by a monkey and copy pasted from a salaried position?

 

[Martynt74]

I thought pro rata but assume that would need line relating to standard working hours?

 

[Jokester]

I'm not sure how normal this is and initially my only concern is whether he could end up being on less that NMW depending on hours worked given the relatively low salary.

His employer would be breaking the law if, averaged out over a period of time (60days maybe, can't remember what it is), meant he was working below the minimum wage.

 

[Rroff]

I think whoever wrote that is trying to pull one.

They are trying to have it both ways - no obligation to pay the employee if they don't feel like it/can't afford it/don't have the work but also cap how much they are paying while getting an employee to do additional hours when it is busy (I bet they'll put the pressure on for overtime despite the no obligation bit).

Stuff like this takes the mick out of why things like zero hours can be useful in some cases and should be banned.

A lot of places do it by having a low contracted hours like 12-20 a week and pay by the hour while expecting a certain amount of overtime when required in the contract - it is a horrible trend but a bit better than contracts like this as it gives both parties something a bit more dependable to work with.

 

[Rroff]

and also being too scared to moan about it because they're worried that instead of working the full time hours they ordinarily do, they'll instead be slashed down to their basic hours and be left in the ****!

This is what they are playing on IMO - a lot of people don't want to rock the boat, too scared or timid to push back or just can't afford to due to living costs, etc.

 

[wesimmo]

His employer would be breaking the law if, averaged out over a period of time (60days maybe, can't remember what it is), meant he was working below the minimum wage.

Yep, we had HMRC in auditing us for such breaches. Even going down to the level of querying why we round up lateness and absence to the nearest 15 mins and whether that took people below minimum wage.

 

[Rroff]

Yep, we had HMRC in auditing us for such breaches. Even going down to the level of querying why we round up lateness and absence to the nearest 15 mins and whether that took people below minimum wage.

We had that - even though most people wouldn't come close to being under minimum wage - but rather than risk it the company just paid everyone a certain backdated figure from lowest paid to top heh to negate any possibility of dropping below minimum wage due to briefings and time rounded up/down etc.

 

[Columbo]

Without a specified hourly rate how or detailed hours of work how does he know how much he should be paid for the hours worked? If he was to be underpaid / overpaid how would you challenge it?

Those terms are not enforceable and not worth the paper they are printed on, any half decent employment lawyer or union would have a field day with that garbage and it should be challenged.

I would be immediately concerned about the role and the company if they allow such drivel to make it into contractual terms, to me it shows a distinct disregard for basic employee rights and simple attention to detail and they are relying upon the fear of not earning anything and not accepting the role to get it past the employee.

I'm a lowly Ops Manager and I would never allow such tripe past me when making offers of employment.

 

[randomshenans]

Is either supposed to be pro rata or is written by a monkey and copy pasted from a salaried position?

Yea, sounds like it's 16k at 40hr week, but if no hours are worked it's zero. That's how I read it but it's written very poorly. Not sure it stands up legally from that wording.

 

[Uther]

It seems internally contradictory. Eg. they say there are no normal hours, there's no guarantee of work, and there's no obligation to accept the work... and they say that because basically guaranteed overtime and compulsory overtime have significant effects when it comes to holiday pay etc... whereas if it's not guaranteed and non-compulsory that's less of an issue (although some tribunal cases indicate that might change...)

But then it says they're expected to work when required/according to the needs of the business, which is contradictory.

As people have said, it seems like an idiot has written that... or they're trying to be too clever for their own good. Re: your NMW concerns, it's one of the things HMRC tries to crack down on when they find out about it...



They do that but have it overtime which isn't guaranteed or compulsory... according to the contract... then they cost less than employees on full time. An old employer tried that on with me back in the day... basically worked ~42 hours religiously, but my contract was for 30ish hours I think. Those extra hours were not guaranteed or compulsory so they basically were trying to do me out of holiday pay... but soon got that changed. TBF my boss was fine about it, but as you're obviously aware of from highlighting this issue, in practice it results in people getting mugged off in terms of holiday pay and also being too scared to moan about it because they're worried that instead of working the full time hours they ordinarily do, they'll instead be slashed down to their basic hours and be left in the ****!

Basically what happened to me, I worked shifts of 46 hours a week for well over a decade, plus at least another 12 hour shift every week then the company changed the contract to 37 hours, while still expecting us to work 46 hours + with 37 hours holiday pay. I threatened then with getting ACAS in before they back tracked. Once they guaranteed 46 hours worth of holiday pay I went to 37 hours a week
Employers can be complete *****.