zero hour contracts

I use to work in electrical retail for a well known bust company and even though I worked there 6 years before getting my act together and forging a completely different career path, I was on a 16 hour contract. We also had a system that if you didn't hit sales targets, the amount of hours you did in the week was cut down to bare minimum, which was insanely destructive on wages due to doing 48+ hour weeks most of the time. It also meant going on any sort of holiday for more than a few days become a serious burden financially due to only being paid the flat rate. No one in our store apart from managers had a full time contract and it was the same at the head office.

Companies often don't care about staff and will just use them for profit margins how they see fit. Its really ****, but theres only one thing you can do about it long term and thats to secure a job that doesn't have such a retarded contract.
 
The nursery I know uses bank staff, so effectively on a zero hour contract, they are just called in when necessary.

The crux of the issue to the employee though, is they can say 'no, sorry I'm busy', there is no obligation for them to work for us if and when we need them.

That's the proper way a zero hour contract should work, but you do hear of the bigger companies expecting their employees to be exclusive, while not guaranteeing them any hours. That's the abuse of the zero hour contract imo.

Oh, and no they won't be eligible for sick pay, but they are legally entitled to holiday pay, it's worked out as 12.07% of actual hours worked (we calculate it every quarter), so the news article has probably got that wrong.
 
pitchfork said:
You have the right to contest unfair working practises by employers.

My union rep knows I won't shut up if I have a problem, a few more people took the initiative then they wouldn't get so abused by their employers.
Click to expand...

But it isn't unfair working practises if the worker signed a contract.
We have a whole department at my place of work with a handful of full time and 100s of zero hours.
Most of them are students and it suits them fine but there are some family people who can't make long term plans.
So let's say they all vote with their feet and walk out, easy, the bosses will just ring more people up and the queue for those jobs is massive because most of the 7000 workforce have kids or nephews/nieces who want to earn some quick money.
 
Dimple said:
So let's say they all vote with their feet and walk out, easy, the bosses will just ring more people up and the queue for those jobs is massive because most of the 7000 workforce have kids or nephews/nieces who want to earn some quick money.
Click to expand...

And this is why no government EVER wants zero unemployment.

High unemployment is good for business ;)
 
I've been on a 0-hour contract for the last 3 years, on 1/2 the pay of contracted workers, and with none of the benefits ;)

You know that legislation about agency workers being given the same conditions as perms? Not worth the paper it's written on. Such is life, and I could leave if I wanted to, at any time.
 
Public bodies use them also, I know councils here do.

I can see where there may be the need or requirements for them, it shouldn't be abused in the way it seems to be.
 
FoxEye said:
You know that legislation about agency workers being given the same conditions as perms? Not worth the paper it's written on.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Until recently I was an agency worker with my current employer and had been a "temp" for 3 before that.

When that legislation kicked in, I got a £50 a week payrise (as they had to pay me the same rate as everyone else) and it meant when I left the agency they had to pay me all the holiday pay I hadn't taken. Before they just wrote it off when you left.
 
If you're on a zero hour contract and you don't like it, there is a simple answer: quit.

Really, the employer owes you nothing. YOU decide you want to work there, and if you don't like it, then there is always someone who will.

The fact of the matter is you don't call the shots. You're being hired to do a job to the employer's satisfaction. It's a free world where people are allowed to make their own choices, but complaining about a contract YOU have signed up for is ridiculous. You may not like the fact you can't get a non zero hour contract, but that is not the employer's fault or responsibility.

And the nonsense about the union stuff is just that, nonsense. As long as an employer isn't breaking any laws, then a union can do jack for you. And even if you knew the employer was breaking the law, anyone with half a brain cell must be able to realise what they can do about fixing the situation without a union.
 
Last edited:
estebanrey said:
I disagree. Until recently I was an agency worker with my current employer and had been a "temp" for 3 before that.

When that legislation kicked in, I got a £50 a week payrise (as they had to pay me the same rate as everyone else) and it meant when I left the agency they had to pay me all the holiday pay I hadn't taken. Before they just wrote it off when you left.
Click to expand...

That £50 payrise was at the discretion of the agency. Most agencies get you to sign a waiver instead.
 
If I was starting a business, there's no way on gods earth I would take any one on full time, and i guess the financial risk carries through to larger business, employees have far too much leverage and it's too much of a financial risk if you get a bad egg. Don't even get me started on unions!

I say this as someone who's worked as a contractor and full time and everything in between. You can't be competitive these days when your wasting resources on a bunch of free loaders who whine all day long because they want a better chair, or the air con is 2 degrees outside their preference because they don't want to actually get on with the job in hand.
 
Last edited:
I've worked for two companies that also do this.

We had people who had family nearby, and would work for us for a few months during the summer... worked fine, didn't need to look for temps...

Then we had people that were doing full-time hours 1 week, and none the next, so needed 2-3 Zero hour jobs...

It has it's pros and cons, but i don't like it from a management point of view.
 
purplesky said:
If you're on a zero hour contract and you don't like it, there is a simple answer: quit.

Really, the employer owes you nothing. YOU decide you want to work there, and if you don't like it, then there is always someone who will.

The fact of the matter is you don't call the shots. You're being hired to do a job to the employer's satisfaction. It's a free world where people are allowed to make their own choices, but complaining about a contract YOU have signed up for is ridiculous. You may not like the fact you can't get a non zero hour contract, but that is not the employer's fault or responsibility.
Click to expand...

Ron Paul pls leave.
 
Worked a 0 hours contract for years, as other people it suited me fine. You just have to play the game for the right employer. Be seen to be working hard and don't take the **** and you'll get on fine. Never had any problems getting hours when I wanted them between stints at uni at a few days notice.

Worked for 3 years full time on the contract, consistently had 50 hours per week doing shifts that suited me, even in Jan and Feb when sales were massively down compared to the rest of the year. As did the other workers that did the job at hand and were low maintenance on the management. Staff that were high maintenance found their hours fluctuated a lot.

What the articles didn't mention, most (basically all but the store manager and deputies) of the staff that work in bars, restaurants, night clubs, fast food places are all on 0 hours contracts which is almost 100,000 people for the likes of McDonalds alone. But when you add context to that, most of those will be 16-24 so those types of contract will suit most of that age group perfectly fine.
 
Last edited:
estebanrey said:
I disagree. Until recently I was an agency worker with my current employer and had been a "temp" for 3 before that.

When that legislation kicked in, I got a £50 a week payrise (as they had to pay me the same rate as everyone else) and it meant when I left the agency they had to pay me all the holiday pay I hadn't taken. Before they just wrote it off when you left.
Click to expand...

re agency workers regs

Well my current employer found a way to negate the regs pretty easily.

The simply said that if I was given a proper contract, it wouldn't be the same contract the others had. I'd be given a contract with the same t&c's as the agency gave me.

Hence they could tell anyone that agency staff were treated the same as contracted staff, when it blatantly isn't true. Like I said, I do the same job as contracted guys on twice my pay, without a pensions or any other benefits.

All they have to do is say those contracts are no longer available to new staff. Hence not worth the paper it's written on.
 
MadMossy said:
Either way a 16 hour contract is a million times better than a zero hour one. Holiday Pay/Sick pay should be paid the average hours worked over a 12 week period. So if he has been working 40+ hours a week as overtime his holiday pay should be based on that.
Click to expand...

This basically!!

I work in retail and im on a 30 hour contract along with 10 other members of staff. We have about another 20 staff that are on 8 hour contracts and we both get paid the average for the past 12 weeks.

So if someone on a 8 hour contract has done an average of 30 hours due to taking on extra shifts, working school holidays etc then they would get paid for the 30 hours on holiday
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom