Myth-busting zero-hours contracts: are they as bad as we are told?

The debate about the use of zero-hours contracts has been around for ages.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/mythbusting-zerohours-contracts-are-they-are-bad-as-we-are-told-10229040.html


Interesting and fair article this and see no problem with these contracts as people I know on them are very happy with the fexability.

do you know anybody personally who is on a zero hour contract ?

korban dallas wrote:do you know anybody personally who is on a zero hour contract ?

Already stated I do, see above.

Yes I do and no,they do not like them.

Handy Andy wrote:Yes I do and no,they do not like them.

Around half the production and warehouse staff have them at my workplace and many are happy as they have flexible hours and there is always work in fact they are always offereing overtime to the staff. I am a demand planner so they have no reason to lie to me. Then there is people I know outside this company who again are happy. I have only met one or two that are not, but then that is more the company they are working for.

My son worked at amazon on a zero hours contract and i must admit he did like it

however the problem comes with the rights they have he had booked a holiday told the manger who failed to notify the employment agency when he returned from his 3 day holiday he was told to go home as he had been fired for non attendance and a black mark was put on his record
it took me two weeks to sort it out for him and get the black mark removed
he was promised by the employment agency when they where taking on again he would be first in line but the employment agency was fired by Amazon and my son was left high and dry he was very upset as he really enjoyed the work
i personally don`t like the idea of zero hour contracts as it removes all the workers rights

Grandson has had his life on hold for two years on a zero hours contract, tried everything to get another job. He can't move on with his life and leave home because he never knows what money he is going to get from week to week, and sometimes doesn't get any hours for weeks on end.

Grandaughter was on a zero hours contract, got herself a better job by moving to Ipswich, but said she would never go on one again if it could possibly be avoided because it was hell, she had to phone in every morning just in case they wanted her.

Friend on zero hours, nearly lost her house because of it, trying to pay a mortgage not knowing what was coming in from week to week was a nightmare. She said if she had children at home she would never have survived, thankfully is out of it now.

75% of staff at Sports Direct zero hours and Mike Ashley has made himself a billionaire out of not giving a damn about his employees.

While people with no responsiblities might not worry, anyone who has family to care for, rent, mortgage etc is up shit creek, and lord help them if they get sick.

korban dallas wrote:My son worked at amazon on a zero hours contract and i must admit he did like it

however the problem comes with the rights they have he had booked a holiday told the manger who failed to notify the employment agency when he returned from his 3 day holiday he was told to go home as he had been fired for non attendance and a black mark was put on his record
it took me two weeks to sort it out for him and get the black mark removed  
he was promised by the employment agency when they where taking on again he would be first in line but the employment agency was fired by Amazon and my son was left high and dry he was very upset as he really enjoyed the work
i personally don`t like the idea of zero hour contracts as it removes all the workers rights

Of course rights are going to be a problem, but to be honest as of yet I have not seen much in the way of abuse yet, Of course this is not to say it does not happen Korben, but I think most of the rhetoric I hear is based on a false premise from people who do know few people doing such contracts. Well that is my view. I think this is still very open to judgement yet and I do think it needs some protection but they certainly seem to benefit a large group of people

Nemesis wrote:

korban dallas wrote:My son worked at amazon on a zero hours contract and i must admit he did like it

however the problem comes with the rights they have he had booked a holiday told the manger who failed to notify the employment agency when he returned from his 3 day holiday he was told to go home as he had been fired for non attendance and a black mark was put on his record
it took me two weeks to sort it out for him and get the black mark removed  
he was promised by the employment agency when they where taking on again he would be first in line but the employment agency was fired by Amazon and my son was left high and dry he was very upset as he really enjoyed the work
i personally don`t like the idea of zero hour contracts as it removes all the workers rights

Of course rights are going to be a problem, but to be honest as of yet I have not seen much in the way of abuse yet, Of course this is not to say it does not happen Korben, but I think most of the rhetoric I hear is based on a false premise from people who do know few people doing such contracts. Well that is my view. I think this is still very open to judgement yet and I do think it needs some protection but they certainly seem to benefit a large group of people

You may have not seen much in the way of abuse yet but to be fair your only seeing it trough a very small aperture ie the people that you know, when view in the national lens  as in the various story's in the news and press  the landscape is some what different

korban dallas wrote:

Nemesis wrote:


Of course rights are going to be a problem, but to be honest as of yet I have not seen much in the way of abuse yet, Of course this is not to say it does not happen Korben, but I think most of the rhetoric I hear is based on a false premise from people who do know few people doing such contracts. Well that is my view. I think this is still very open to judgement yet and I do think it needs some protection but they certainly seem to benefit a large group of people

You may have not seen much in the way of abuse yet but to be fair your only seeing it trough a very small aperture ie the people that you know, when view in the national lens  as in the various story's in the news and press  the landscape is some what different

Not seeing this through the news but daily with work and people I know. This maybe a small sample, but this sample is one that is showing how it is by them well received. There is always going to be good and bad in any policy and like I say the jury is still out on this. I do think critics though are not speaking enough to the many people who are such contracts or of the ones they are just using those that seek to make their political advantage over this. The news is always biased one way or the other, so of all things that is the least best perspective you will gauge from this policy

Nemesis wrote:

korban dallas wrote:My son worked at amazon on a zero hours contract and i must admit he did like it

however the problem comes with the rights they have he had booked a holiday told the manger who failed to notify the employment agency when he returned from his 3 day holiday he was told to go home as he had been fired for non attendance and a black mark was put on his record
it took me two weeks to sort it out for him and get the black mark removed  
he was promised by the employment agency when they where taking on again he would be first in line but the employment agency was fired by Amazon and my son was left high and dry he was very upset as he really enjoyed the work
i personally don`t like the idea of zero hour contracts as it removes all the workers rights

Of course rights are going to be a problem, but to be honest as of yet I have not seen much in the way of abuse yet, Of course this is not to say it does not happen Korben, but I think most of the rhetoric I hear is based on a false premise from people who do know few people doing such contracts. Well that is my view. I think this is still very open to judgement yet and I do think it needs some protection but they certainly seem to benefit a large group of people

but then you dont give a monkeys as long as your masters get fatter and richer.....

zero hours should be banned

employment agencies shut down and their assets (and those of their owners) seized

darknessss wrote:

Nemesis wrote:


Of course rights are going to be a problem, but to be honest as of yet I have not seen much in the way of abuse yet, Of course this is not to say it does not happen Korben, but I think most of the rhetoric I hear is based on a false premise from people who do know few people doing such contracts. Well that is my view. I think this is still very open to judgement yet and I do think it needs some protection but they certainly seem to benefit a large group of people

but then you dont give a monkeys as long as your masters get fatter and richer.....

zero hours should be banned

employment agencies shut down and their assets (and those of their owners) seized

I have no masters and this is not Dr who. I actually care to think of the people working them and if they approve or disapprove of which again the jury is out. I happen to think they have merit as others do. You have your views, that seem to be trapped in some time warp, maybe you should ask the doctor for assistance.

Ciao.

no dodgy didge...

we keep hearing tis crap from you

"oh of course there are problems"


"oh of course some things are not right"

on all and every subject


and yet ....never a suggestion as to what should be done ...or one whit of sympathy for the "victims"

to you they become "collateral damage" and can safely be discarded when no one is looking.....

the system is rotten....

and zero hours contracts are a syphyllitic sore on society....

Nemesis wrote:The debate about the use of zero-hours contracts has been around for ages.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/mythbusting-zerohours-contracts-are-they-are-bad-as-we-are-told-10229040.html


Interesting and fair article this and see no problem with these contracts as people I know on them are very happy with the fexability.

I think the only one who benefits from a zero hour contract are the companies who impose them on their workers.

Nemesis wrote:

darknessss wrote:

but then you dont give a monkeys as long as your masters get fatter and richer.....

zero hours should be banned

employment agencies shut down and their assets (and those of their owners) seized

I have no masters and this is not Dr who. I actually care to think of the people working them and if they approve or disapprove of which again the jury is out. I happen to think they have merit as others do. You have your views, that seem to be trapped in some time warp, maybe you should ask the doctor for assistance.

Ciao.

so your more like Samaritan (i dont suspect you will understand that reference) and there`s always a doctor

we may live in a throw away society but when we start throwing away people its gone to far

korban dallas wrote:do you know anybody personally who is on a zero hour contract ?

Anyone who's done temping will be on a type of zero hour contract. They join an agency but they're not guaranteed any work. I've done that several times before. Anyone who's self employed is in the same boat.

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Nemesis wrote:The debate about the use of zero-hours contracts has been around for ages.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/mythbusting-zerohours-contracts-are-they-are-bad-as-we-are-told-10229040.html


Interesting and fair article this and see no problem with these contracts as people I know on them are very happy with the fexability.

I think the only one who benefits from a zero hour contract are the companies who impose them on their workers.

Not necessarily. Someone who wouldn't mind a bit of work but isn't that bothered would benefit too. If someone needs a regular income, they shouldn't sign up for a zero-hour contract.

yes yes ragg we know you are stupid...

let me explain.....if they fail to sign up for one when offered ...they will be sanctioned by the benefit nazis

darknessss wrote:yes yes ragg we know you are stupid...

let me explain.....if they fail to sign up for one when offered ...they will be sanctioned by the benefit nazis

So they either get work or they get benefits - what does it matter to them? They're free to look for a job which isn't zero hours.

Do you think you could possibly ever post without calling me "stupid"? It just shows you up for the moron you are.

Raggamuffin wrote:

darknessss wrote:yes yes ragg we know you are stupid...

let me explain.....if they fail to sign up for one when offered ...they will be sanctioned by the benefit nazis

So they either get work or they get benefits - what does it matter to them? They're free to look for a job which isn't zero hours.

Do you think you could possibly ever post without calling me "stupid"? It just shows you up for the moron you are.

they are NOT "free"

if they are offered a zero hours job they HAVE to take it...or get sanctioned.....stop proving me right ,,

darknessss wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

So they either get work or they get benefits - what does it matter to them? They're free to look for a job which isn't zero hours.

Do you think you could possibly ever post without calling me "stupid"? It just shows you up for the moron you are.

they are NOT "free"

if they are offered a zero hours job they HAVE to take it...or get sanctioned.....stop proving me right ,,

Are you saying that they're not allowed to apply for other jobs? Are you saying that if they have a zero hours contract, they're not allowed to resign and get another job?

If they take on a zero hours contract to retain their benefits, they either get work, in which case they won't need the benefits, or if they don't get work they still get the benefits.

How stupid are you?

i think we are going round in circles.....


the point is zero hours contracts are bad...full stop

exploititative and create more poverty thatn they solve....

I would make them illegal....

darknessss wrote:i think we are going round in circles.....


the point is zero hours contracts are bad...full stop

exploititative and create more poverty thatn they solve....

I would make them illegal....

I've explained that some people might not mind them. Not everyone is on benefits you know.

What about temp agencies - how are they going to guarantee someone work? They can only offer out work if they have been asked to by their clients.

Raggamuffin wrote:

darknessss wrote:i think we are going round in circles.....


the point is zero hours contracts are bad...full stop

exploititative and create more poverty thatn they solve....

I would make them illegal....

I've explained that some people might not mind them. Not everyone is on benefits you know.

What about temp agencies - how are they going to guarantee someone work? They can only offer out work if they have been asked to by their clients.

Actually, people on zero hours contracts are nearly always on work related benefits, they have to be because they don't get enough money coming in every week. Which means in effect that the tax-payer is underwriting the business that he works for (and the business is making money out of it).

yup...temp agencies would be the next on my list of exploiters......

darknessss wrote:yup...temp agencies would be the next on my list of exploiters......

Really? I've used temp agencies in the past, as I said, and they've been very useful. In London, they generally had plenty of work, but of course it wasn't guaranteed. Other times they haven't had much work, but it was my choice to sign up with one, and it didn't prevent me from looking for other jobs. Some people really do like the flexibility of temping.

risingsun wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I've explained that some people might not mind them. Not everyone is on benefits you know.

What about temp agencies - how are they going to guarantee someone work? They can only offer out work if they have been asked to by their clients.

Actually, people on zero hours contracts are nearly always on work related benefits, they have to be because they don't get enough money coming in every week.   Which means in effect that the tax-payer is underwriting the business that he works for (and the business is making money out of it).

You mean that the zero hours contract came first, and the benefits came afterwards?

I can think of times when a business might want to employ people on a casual basis - if they have a high employee turnover, for example, and they need someone to cover whilst they're advertising the jobs. Of course the person who did that would be free to apply for the job themselves.

Raggamuffin wrote:

darknessss wrote:yup...temp agencies would be the next on my list of exploiters......

Really? I've used temp agencies in the past, as I said, and they've been very useful. In London, they generally had plenty of work, but of course it wasn't guaranteed. Other times they haven't had much work, but it was my choice to sign up with one, and it didn't prevent me from looking for other jobs. Some people really do like the flexibility of temping.

So have I.   So what.  You seem to think it's the same as being on a zero hours contract.   It's not.  You can pick and chose with an agency.   With a zero hours contract if the firm have no work for you, you are not allowed to go and work for someone else, you have to be ready when they need you again. They can also call you in for a couple of hours and then say the job is done and go home.  In order to survive on zero hours when you are not getting enough hours and you have family to feed and rent or mortgage to pay you have to claim working tax benefit.  Which means the firm is being subsidised.

one wonders why a business would have a high employee turn over

I usually find its becasue they are a shit company to work for.....

darknessss wrote:one wonders why a business would have a high employee turn over

I usually find its becasue they are a shit company to work for.....

Some businesses just do - it might be the nature of the work or whatever.

Raggamuffin wrote:

darknessss wrote:one wonders why a business would have a high employee turn over

I usually find its becasue they are a shit company to work for.....

Some businesses just do - it might be the nature of the work or whatever.

Well hopefully come Friday that will have to be more efficient won't they.

risingsun wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Really? I've used temp agencies in the past, as I said, and they've been very useful. In London, they generally had plenty of work, but of course it wasn't guaranteed. Other times they haven't had much work, but it was my choice to sign up with one, and it didn't prevent me from looking for other jobs. Some people really do like the flexibility of temping.

So have I.   So what.  You seem to think it's the same as being on a zero hours contract.   It's not.  You can pick and chose with an agency.   With a zero hours contract if the firm have no work for you, you are not allowed to go and work for someone else, you have to be ready when they need you again.  They can also call you in for a couple of hours and then say the job is done and go home.  In order to survive on zero hours when you are not getting enough hours and you have family to feed and rent or mortgage to pay you have to claim working tax benefit.  Which means the firm is being subsidised.

It's basically the same because an agency will not guarantee work - they'll offer you work if they have any.

I agree that someone with a zero hours contract should be able to work for someone else though. Perhaps that should be changed. They don't all have that clause do they?

I don't see that the firm is being subsidised really - if they need people to work, they'll pay them for the hours they do. It's not as if they're getting work done for free.

risingsun wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Some businesses just do - it might be the nature of the work or whatever.

Well hopefully come Friday that will have to be more efficient won't they.  

What do you mean? You can't force companies to not have a high turnover - that would mean forcing staff to stay in a job they don't want to do.

Raggamuffin wrote:

risingsun wrote:

Well hopefully come Friday that will have to be more efficient won't they.  

What do you mean? You can't force companies to not have a high turnover - that would mean forcing staff to stay in a job they don't want to do.

You obviously haven't read a manifesto. Companies can have high turnover, they just won't be allowed zero hours contracts. I was the Financial Manager for a company whose work level went up and down, we did not use zero hours contracts and I would not have tolerated them. You have a small full time staff, and if you have extra work you can't handle, you employ temporary staff full time until the job is done. They are then free to get another job. You do not make people sit at home waiting for the phone to ring, or bring them in for a couple of hours and then send them home so that they can't get a full days pay for that day. Only shit firms who cannot organise themselves, want to do everything the cheapest way possible so that only the directors make money, and don't give a shit about anyone else but themselves, use zero hours.

risingsun wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

What do you mean? You can't force companies to not have a high turnover - that would mean forcing staff to stay in a job they don't want to do.

You obviously haven't read a manifesto.   Companies can have high turnover, they just won't be allowed zero hours contracts.   I was the Financial Manager for a company whose work level went up and down, we did not use zero hours contracts and I would not have tolerated them.  You have a small full time staff, and if you have extra work you can't handle, you employ temporary staff full time until the job is done.   They are then free to get another job.   You do not make people sit at home waiting for the phone to ring, or bring them in for a couple of hours and then send them home so that they can't get a full days pay for that day.   Only shit firms who cannot organise themselves, want to do everything the cheapest way possible so that only the directors make money, and don't give a shit about anyone else but themselves, use zero hours.

The article doesn't say that zero hours contracts will be banned, it says that exclusivity clauses would be banned. I have no problem with that.

So what are the Tories and Labour proposing? The Tories are proposing to ban exclusivity clauses in zero-hours contracts. These clauses prevent people finding other work to boost their hours.

I also think that if a company calls someone in, they should be obliged to say how many hours it's for, and pay them for those hours, even if they send them home. As a temp, I've had work placements which ended prematurely, so it was a bit annoying.

Let's say a company has a high turnover rate, and a short notice period. Workers could leave before the company has had a chance to replace them, but they still need the work done until they can do so. Using a temp agency amounts to pretty much the same thing doesn't it?

Labour leader Ed Miliband explains why he will BAN zero hours contracts for workers
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-leader-ed-miliband-explains-5420139


And no it doesn't amount to the same thing.

Now I'm leaving it, because you don't seem to understand the situation zero hours workers are put in and I've got an early start in the morning.

Happy voting.

pfffft...happy voting it wont be....


i am. i'm afraid , pushed into the position, so exquisitely described by HF on another thread. as "voting for the shiniest turd"

risingsun wrote:Labour leader Ed Miliband explains why he will BAN zero hours contracts for workers
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-leader-ed-miliband-explains-5420139


And no it doesn't amount to the same thing.

Now I'm leaving it, because you don't seem to understand the situation zero hours workers are put in and I've got an early start in the morning.

Happy voting.

I do understand it - you just don't read my posts properly.

Get off your high horse for once. Your know-it-all attitude is pathetic.

This is what Miliband has actually said:

"In our first year of government, Labour will pass a law that says if you're working regular hours, you'll get a regular contract... a legal right that will apply to all workers after 12 weeks," he said.

So he's only going to apply it to people who are doing regular hours anyway. That's not the same as banning zero hours contracts is it?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32147715