[Kizzy]

'Nearly one in four unemployed adults in the UK have been offered zero-hours contracts, according to research which also shows that more than half who could have taken up a job on this basis turned it down.

The preference for no job rather than a zero-hours job is is more prevalent among older job-seekers, according to the study by global jobs and recruitment marketplace Glassdoor, while the main reasons for rejecting the offers were the need for a guaranteed level of income in order to stop receiving benefits, and lack of trust in the prospective employers.

Overall, 40% of unemployed adults said they would accept a zero-hours contract if they were offered one. By age group, this was as high as 47% among 16-24-year-olds and only 24% of those aged 55 years or older.

Zero-hours contracts allow employers to hire staff with no guarantee of work. They have attracted strong criticism from the unions who claim they are exploitative and unfair.'

How do people still think about 0hr contracts... With 1 in 4 of jobseekers now employed in this way are they sustainable and provide a secure future for workers in the UK?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...all-unemployed

[user104658]

There are a few people that these contracts are suitable for. Teenagers still living at home, University students, people who are retired and can live off their pension but want to top it up, and the second adult in a home where the first adult's income is enough to support the family (again where it's wanted just as an income top-up).

They are not a suitable primary income either for a single adult, or for a family.

So, whilst I don't think they should be illegal, they should basically exist under the following stipulations:

1) They are for the sorts of people mentioned above who are genuinely SEEKING that sort of income ONLY. They should not be considered viable employment for the purposes of, for example, forcing people on JSA to attend interviews / sanctioning benefits if they won't take one of these positions.

2) They must be flexible ON BOTH ENDS to suit the needs of the sorts of people mentioned above (i.e. students, and those with childcare responsibilities). By which I mean, the contract is not for any set hours, so the employer doesn't have to offer hours if there are none available BUT ALSO the employee doesn't have to take hours that are offered.

This worked well for my wife who worked in a care home whilst she was at University. Basically it was Zero-hours, but how it worked was that the home put up a list for what shifts were available for the following month, and then the employees could put themselves down for those shifts if they wanted them. Worked very well for a student as she could, for example, work loads of hours during Uni holidays or weeks when she had fewer classes, but didn't have to work at all during busy times such as exams, and could go home to her hometown or come to visit me whenever she wanted as there was no pressure to take shifts.

My own job while I was at Uni (chef in a student bar) worked similarly, but it was on a week to week basis and the timesheet was put up, then you "scored out" any times that you didn't want to work (be that certain hours, whole days, or the whole week) and the manager made up a rota around that. Again, handy for me taking time off to travel to visit her, or book three days off for a night out + 2 day hangover...

Where they really, really don't work is when the employers dictate everything - telling people that they have no hours at all one week, but then forcing them to work 40 on the days they choose the next week with the threat of losing the job if they don't comply.


TL;DR - they're fine as a casual job or income top-up for people who want, but dont NEED, the extra money. They are NOT viable full time employment. You have no rights, no holidays, no sick pay, no job security. I can't imagine trying to support a family in that situation, I would be constantly stressed out of my mind.

[smudgie]

I think they are a disgrace.
Let's get back to casual labour..for holiday/festive /seasonal work etc then ban the rest.
Part timers should get contracts the same as full timers.

[Anaesthesia]

It's an interesting question in light of the fact the entire work culture has changed beyond recognition in the past few years.

You're kidding yourself if you think you have job security...they can get rid of you on a whim, I've seen it happen.

You're kidding yourself if you think your bosses will support you, they'll take every idea you have on as their own, if it's any good.

You're kidding yourself if you think you'll be any more than a human resource.

You're kidding yourself if you think that working all the hours God sends to positively benefit your company will have any personal benefits.

If you willingly work the extra, they will just pile more and more upon you.

I recently quit because of these circumstances. The employer has the employee by the nuts in the vast majority of cases, and can do this to perfectly good workers.

And you wonder why I support unions?

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Anaesthesia

It's an interesting question in light of the fact the entire work culture has changed beyond recognition in the past few years.

You're kidding yourself if you think you have job security...they can get rid of you on a whim, I've seen it happen.

You're kidding yourself if you think your bosses will support you, they'll take every idea you have on as their own, if it's any good.

You're kidding yourself if you think you'll be any more than a human resource.

You're kidding yourself if you think that working all the hours God sends to positively benefit your company will have any personal benefits.

If you willingly work the extra, they will just pile more and more upon you.

I recently quit because of these circumstances. The employer has the employee by the nuts in the vast majority of cases, and can do this to perfectly good workers.

And you wonder why I support unions?

I wonder why anyone would be so stupid as to NOT support the unions

[Anaesthesia]

Me too Kizzy...unions have been vilified for too long, time for everyone to wake up, I hope...?

[Jords]

Im currently on a zero-hour contract as a general assistant in a kitchen. Im getting contracted for 30 hours in the next couple of weeks though! Whilst in between interviews for grad positions.

[Kizzy]

But what about the profits?!... Won't someone pleeeeease think about the profits??

[Anaesthesia]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

But what about the profits?!... Won't someone pleeeeease think about the profits??

OMG, please think about the profits! A world without materialism is surely no world at all!!

[Anaesthesia]

Originally Posted by Jords

Im currently on a zero-hour contract as a general assistant in a kitchen. Im getting contracted for 30 hours in the next couple of weeks though! Whilst in between interviews for grad positions.

Congrats on getting a job, really! I think the zero hour may be good for students on break. My son did a zero hour contract with Primark, great for his work ethic, but considering his qualifications in agriculture, not ideal. He is working as a reptile handler now on a perm contract, a module he trained on.

The amount of times he would phone me crying because he didn't have enough hours to live on was crazy. They can adjust your hours at any time to suit themselves.

The market right now is shutting out a ridiculous amount of 16-24s unless they take up 0 hour contracts, which to me is just wrong.

[Jamesy]

I'm on a zero hour contract with the NHS and have luckily been given 37.5 hours a week for the past 3 months.

I must say while I enjoy my job I don't like being on zero hours. No job is safe these days, although when you know you're not bound to any hours it does feel like you can be thrown away far more easily and abused a bit more (although I've had no problems in my job).

I agree above that zero hour contracts are suitable for students, those living with parents, OAPs or just anyone that has someone that can financially support them. I live with my parents currently so I have that safety zone if work did decide to leave me with little to no hours some weeks. My parents have said if I get no work they'll support me. But if I were living on my own or with a partner I wouldn't want a 0 hour job, and wouldn't accept one or apply for one.

[Tom4784]

I can't blame anyone for turning them down especially older people who will have more in the way of responsibilities and can't afford to work irregular hours.

I don't think there's many reasons for teenagers and people without bills and such to turn them down since work is work but I think anyone who has responsibilities should be allowed to turn it down.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

There are a few people that these contracts are suitable for. Teenagers still living at home, University students, people who are retired and can live off their pension but want to top it up, and the second adult in a home where the first adult's income is enough to support the family (again where it's wanted just as an income top-up).

They are not a suitable primary income either for a single adult, or for a family.

So, whilst I don't think they should be illegal, they should basically exist under the following stipulations:

1) They are for the sorts of people mentioned above who are genuinely SEEKING that sort of income ONLY. They should not be considered viable employment for the purposes of, for example, forcing people on JSA to attend interviews / sanctioning benefits if they won't take one of these positions.

2) They must be flexible ON BOTH ENDS to suit the needs of the sorts of people mentioned above (i.e. students, and those with childcare responsibilities). By which I mean, the contract is not for any set hours, so the employer doesn't have to offer hours if there are none available BUT ALSO the employee doesn't have to take hours that are offered.

This worked well for my wife who worked in a care home whilst she was at University. Basically it was Zero-hours, but how it worked was that the home put up a list for what shifts were available for the following month, and then the employees could put themselves down for those shifts if they wanted them. Worked very well for a student as she could, for example, work loads of hours during Uni holidays or weeks when she had fewer classes, but didn't have to work at all during busy times such as exams, and could go home to her hometown or come to visit me whenever she wanted as there was no pressure to take shifts.

My own job while I was at Uni (chef in a student bar) worked similarly, but it was on a week to week basis and the timesheet was put up, then you "scored out" any times that you didn't want to work (be that certain hours, whole days, or the whole week) and the manager made up a rota around that. Again, handy for me taking time off to travel to visit her, or book three days off for a night out + 2 day hangover...

Where they really, really don't work is when the employers dictate everything - telling people that they have no hours at all one week, but then forcing them to work 40 on the days they choose the next week with the threat of losing the job if they don't comply.


TL;DR - they're fine as a casual job or income top-up for people who want, but dont NEED, the extra money. They are NOT viable full time employment. You have no rights, no holidays, no sick pay, no job security. I can't imagine trying to support a family in that situation, I would be constantly stressed out of my mind.

This^
They should be optional for people who want them and the exclusion of a working hour contract means that staff can turn down hours that don't suit them and the should NOT be used as a weapon by the Job Centre to get people off benefits in jobs that don't guarantee them a regular income.People with a mortgage/rent and a family can't live on a zero hour contract.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Anaesthesia

It's an interesting question in light of the fact the entire work culture has changed beyond recognition in the past few years.

You're kidding yourself if you think you have job security...they can get rid of you on a whim, I've seen it happen.

You're kidding yourself if you think your bosses will support you, they'll take every idea you have on as their own, if it's any good.

You're kidding yourself if you think you'll be any more than a human resource.

You're kidding yourself if you think that working all the hours God sends to positively benefit your company will have any personal benefits.

If you willingly work the extra, they will just pile more and more upon you.

I recently quit because of these circumstances. The employer has the employee by the nuts in the vast majority of cases, and can do this to perfectly good workers.

And you wonder why I support unions?

I agree.

I do feel the pendulum has swung too far the other way now and that Unions need more influence.

Your post demonstrates how bad some businesses become and how a lot of things need looking at and reforming there too.

Really good post and spot on too.

[bots]

Zero hours contracts have a role to play for very specific job roles where it is acceptable and advantageous to both the employer and the employee. Outside of that, employers should be fined/penalised if they offer them as a cop out to offering steady and predictable employment.