Budget 2015

[LamieRobertson]

No, clearly the rise of these contracts is a relatively new thing and the statistics and surveys are still lagging behind. So the information we have is forming a picture of what actually these contracts are about, but the picture is by no means definitive. My 'think' is no more doubtful than yours or Westdene's fanciful notion of students being able to pick and choose when they want to work at their leisure as a meaningful example of what these contracts mean to the employee.

Check back i haven't said a word...i merely asked as i was curious as to how you had arrived at that notion...i could have assumed of course, but politely asked.
I can assume of course and may guess that its not as nice and cosy as a student saying I want to work those hours and please myself....if that is the case i would throw into the mix my son who has a 18 hour contract to fit around a college placing he may secure, but he is always under pressure to work more hours and finds it hard to say no on the basis lack of cooperation means your out!

 

[Bozza]

I was a student 20 years ago, and worked various bar and service jobs, in similar flexible terms but none were on zero hour contracts.

Did you have any contract at all?

Can someone please point me to what the last Labour government did about ZHC? Presumably they implemented all sorts of legislation to stop them, as they are so evil, but those dastardly Tories quickly dismantled all of that, allowing the unscrupulous barons of industry ride roughshod over their poor minions. Is that right?

Oh, it seems not. This from their white paper at the time: "Some 200,000 people in the UK work under zero hours contracts. These contracts do not specify particular hours: the person may be required at any or at specified times. These contracts maximise flexibility for employers and suit some people who want occasional earnings. Many employers ensure the contracts are used sensibly, but they have the potential to be abused. For example, in theory, employees could be asked to “clock off” and so lose pay in quiet periods but without being able to leave the premises. Being “on call” might also create difficulties in claiming benefit, even though no work was being done or money earned.

3.15 The Government wishes to retain the flexibility these contracts offer business and believes that the National Minimum Wage and Working Time Directive will provide important basic protections against some of the potential abuses."

 

[beorhthelm]

I was a student 20 years ago, and worked various bar and service jobs, in similar flexible terms but none were on zero hour contracts.

unless you had a commitment to a certain number of hours, yes they were.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Did you have any contract at all?

Can someone please point me to what the last Labour government did about ZHC? Presumably they implemented all sorts of legislation to stop them, as they are so evil, but those dastardly Tories quickly dismantled all of that, allowing the unscrupulous barons of industry ride roughshod over their poor minions. Is that right?

Oh, it seems not. This from their white paper at the time: "Some 200,000 people in the UK work under zero hours contracts. These contracts do not specify particular hours: the person may be required at any or at specified times. These contracts maximise flexibility for employers and suit some people who want occasional earnings. Many employers ensure the contracts are used sensibly, but they have the potential to be abused. For example, in theory, employees could be asked to “clock off” and so lose pay in quiet periods but without being able to leave the premises. Being “on call” might also create difficulties in claiming benefit, even though no work was being done or money earned.

3.15 The Government wishes to retain the flexibility these contracts offer business and believes that the National Minimum Wage and Working Time Directive will provide important basic protections against some of the potential abuses."

I worked for the university library so had a contract with them that had a basic wage and hours, but that could be varied with a stipulated notice period. Suited me quite well as I could manage the hours around my studio work. Worked in a pub too, did sign a contract but have no idea what that was to be fair.

As for what either party is saying about it, that is largely irrelevant to us discussing whether they are a good or bad thing or not?

Yes, we can say Labour are just as bad as the Tories, or whatever, but it's been quite a healthy debate so far on just what people think about the contracts themselves.

I'm pretty sure whoever is in power quite likes them as they make the employment figures look good. Would I be surprised if Labour got in power and suddenly ZHC slipped off the agenda? No not at all...

 

[Bold Seagull]

unless you had a commitment to a certain number of hours, yes they were.

I tell you what, I've never taken a job where I didn't commit to doing a certain number of hours. The very notion of taking a job not to commit to do any hours is rather perverse don't you think?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I was a student 20 years ago, and worked various bar and service jobs, in similar flexible terms but none were on zero hour contracts.

So your bar jobs required you to work at least a minimum number of hours each week / month ?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I tell you what, I've never taken a job where I didn't commit to doing a certain number of hours. The very notion of taking a job not to commit to do any hours is rather perverse don't you think?

So you've never actually had a ZHC then !

 

[Bozza]

As for what either party is saying about it, that is largely irrelevant to us discussing whether they are a good or bad thing or not?

Yes, we can say Labour are just as bad as the Tories, or whatever, but it's been quite a healthy debate so far on just what people think about the contracts themselves.

I'm pretty sure whoever is in power quite likes them as they make the employment figures look good. Would I be surprised if Labour got in power and suddenly ZHC slipped off the agenda? No not at all...

Maybe it's merely my interpretation, but it strikes me as those with allegiances to the left seem to be using ZHC simply in the manner of "Same old Tories, looking after their rich industry toff chums".

I have little experience of them, personally, but we have one person on here who is suggesting that they worked favourably for him. This doesn't seem to be an isolated case, as revealed in a CIPD survey last year:

People employed without a specified number of hours actually reported a better working lifestyle to the CIPD. Only 58 per cent of people on regular contracts say they were happy with their work-life balance, as opposed to 65 per cent on zero-hours contracts who said the same.

The poll also says 47 per cent of people employed on a zero-hours basis are satisfied having no minimum working time set, as opposed to 27 per cent who are dissatisfied.

Again, we have some pro-left posters who seem happy to dismiss ZHC as entirely negative for all involved, despite having little obvious grounds for doing so.

 

[jimbob5]

Face it. Zero hours mean you sit at home and wait for the phone to ring 1. Because you have to be available. 2. Because you can't afford to go anywhere anyway. If you are not available or don't want to show up at the drop of a hat you'll be fired and probably not get benefits. Either way you probably cannot afford to pay the exorbitant rent of the greedy landlords who are encouraged by Bank of England policies.
As for the budget. Yes clever. For example if you are a saver you have been 'starved' for so long, you'll gobble up the bread crumbs. If you are a first time buyer you will think they are doing you a favour by giving you up to £3000 to put towards buying a house, oblivious to the fact that the property is probably tens of thousand higher than it would be but for the political machine stoking it up. Of course the tax threshold thing was a Liberal idea and a good one but perversely will be a vote winner for the Tories. Don't get me wrong I still have not forgiven Labour for the HIP I was obliged to buy to try and sell my flat.

 

[jimbob5]

Face it. Zero hours mean you sit at home and wait for the phone to ring 1. Because you have to be available. 2. Because you can't afford to go anywhere anyway. If you are not available or don't want to show up at the drop of a hat you'll be fired and probably not get benefits. Either way you probably cannot afford to pay the exorbitant rent of the greedy landlords who are encouraged by Bank of England policies.
As for the budget. Yes clever. For example if you are a saver you have been 'starved' for so long, you'll gobble up the bread crumbs. If you are a first time buyer you will think they are doing you a favour by giving you up to £3000 to put towards buying a house, oblivious to the fact that the property is probably tens of thousand higher than it would be but for the political machine stoking it up. Of course the tax threshold thing was a Liberal idea and a good one but perversely will be a vote winner for the Tories. Don't get me wrong I still have not forgiven Labour for the HIP I was obliged to buy to try and sell my flat.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Face it. Zero hours mean you sit at home and wait for the phone to ring 1. Because you have to be available. 2. Because you can't afford to go anywhere anyway. If you are not available or don't want to show up at the drop of a hat you'll be fired and probably not get benefits.

But that isn't how they all work ..... some are beneficial to both parties.

 

[ForestRowSeagull]

ZHC worked very well for me as a student as I could do loads of hours in the holidays and do few/none in exam times. I can however see how they'd be abused and safeguards needed, they're probably best to be only allowed in pubs/entertainment etc rather than some of the examples of exploitation pointed out above.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23573442

"Figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), based on a survey of workers, found 583,000 people were on zero-hours contracts. That represents about 2% of the UK workforce." (April 2014)

Very convenient to ignore the latest figures from the ONS which mention 1.8M ZHC in August 2014 and 697k ZHC in February 2015. Plus the fact these figures could be under reported if the respondents to the survey don't use English as their first language.

 

[Vegas Seagull]

Under this booming economy more 'proper' roles are being created every minute making it easier for those on ZHC to move away from them if they wish. simultaneously those that offer ZHC will need to review their Employment policies or they will have lessening volume and quality of persons to call on. Good news all round

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

You cannot simply take a 5 year period of Labour rule to '79, without having recourse to Ted Heath's own government prior to that. You couldn't argue the the state of the country inherited in '79 was any worse than that left in '74.

You cannot then judge 18 years of power by saying the balance of that is weighed by what Labour left in '79 to what they inherited in '97 - that is just nonsensical. If your judging economics, you have to judge it on objective performance over 18 years, not just what the other party did after or left before.

From '97 to '08, we had 11 years of relatively calm economic stability. Simple in hindsight to say more should have been put away, but as anyone who knows their figures will know, the global financial crash would have taken out any surplus anyway, it would have been a drop in the ocean. The Tories could have no more prevented the huge extent of the financial collapse anymore than I could score a hat trick at 40 yrs old away to Blackburn if Hughton rang me up and told me to clean my boots!

I agree about unhealthy competition for the NHS, and also the dangerous obsession with 'free' and 'academy' status schools. If the trojan horses in Birmingham schools should have proved one thing, is that freedom to create free schools outside of local authority or societies control, we are asking for serious trouble. The obsession with a smaller state is not always a good one.

Nonsense, it was in a far worse state, re 1979.

A government IMO should be judged on what they their legacy is. I think we are at completely different ends of the spectrum on this one - all opinions.

Like yourself reading one of your later posts, I do not know which way to vote this time around, mainly because I'm so irked by the NHS........

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

But that isn't how they all work ..... some are beneficial to both parties.

I would say that is how 95% work. My employer has workers on 8 hours per week contracts who were taken on mid 2014 who wait for a phone call on their listed 6 days off to tell them a shift is available the following day. I only work part time and additional hours (paid at single rate) used to added into my rota , this is no longer the case. I don't get any phone calls because I refused to take a series of 2 and 2½ hour shifts where you can turn up and if it isn't busy you get sent home 5 minutes after clocking on.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I would say that is how 95% work. My employer has workers on 8 hours per week contracts who were taken on mid 2014 who wait for a phone call on their listed 6 days off to tell them a shift is available the following day. I only work part time and additional hours (paid at single rate) used to added into my rota , this is no longer the case. I don't get any phone calls because I refused to take a series of 2 and 2½ hour shifts where you can turn up and if it isn't busy you get sent home 5 minutes after clocking on.

Then it is that type of ZHC that needs to be altered. I've not experienced that type but those I did sign with hotels etc ( and we're talking well known places like the Royal Albion and The Metropole ) work extremely well for me. It's very over simplistic for people to start shouting 'ban then, ban them' in a Monty Python stoning style when they haven't actually experienced them ( and let's admit it - the politicians complaining about them won't have ever worked under one ! ).

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Then it is that type of ZHC that needs to be altered. I've not experienced that type but those I did sign with hotels etc ( and we're talking well known places like the Royal Albion and The Metropole ) work extremely well for me. It's very over simplistic for people to start shouting 'ban then, ban them' in a Monty Python stoning style when they haven't actually experienced them ( and let's admit it - the politicians complaining about them won't have ever worked under one ! ).

Do you really need to experience a ZHC to understand it? They're incredibly simple to understand.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Do you really need to experience a ZHC to understand it? They're incredibly simple to understand.

Given the calls to ban them and Bold Seagull's posts ( and yes I know, he hasn't said ban them ) I'd suggest they clearly aren't simple enough ! I'm not sure how difficult it is for people to understand that they do and can work .... in the right circumstance. Only an idiot would call for an outright ban on them.

 

[Bozza]

I note that Labour MPs are fond of using zero hour contracts for people who work for them.

The union Unite, in response said: "Parliament passed the laws that are supposed to protect pay and conditions – our MPs ought to be upholding them, setting a high standard for employers.

“We are calling on those MPs using zero-hours contracts to move their staff on to secure contracts immediately.”