[Misc] Zero hours contracts

[BensGrandad]

Here we go again.......it's everyone else

Nothing to do with me being right or not more to do with the way people have viewed my opinion and perhaps I am to blame for not making it clear what I meant to back up my view.

 

[StonehamPark]

You are all getting the wrong angle of this or misinterpreting my view. I am not talking of staff that are taken on for a specific need as in a pub who advertise for a barmaid who must be prepared to do Friday and Saturday but firms that employ somebody full time 5 days a week in what ever job and then turn around and say to the worker we have no work for you today or tomorrow. Consequently they receive no pay through no fault of theirs

Are we talking about a 'full time' cash-in-hand laboring job?

 

[BensGrandad]

No full time on PAYE paid either weekly or monthly. I think it is wrong that the firm can just say sorry we have no work to morrow so dont need you.

 

[dazzer6666]

No full time on PAYE paid either weekly or monthly. I think it is wrong that the firm can just say sorry we have no work to morrow so dont need you.

I assume you've got a specific example that has prompted this thread.........? Did the person involved understand it was a ZHC when they took the job on ? Were the terms explained ?

 

[Chicken Run]

No full time on PAYE paid either weekly or monthly. I think it is wrong that the firm can just say sorry we have no work to morrow so dont need you.

They can if a ZHC was agreed in advance of a worker being taken on surely ?

 

[BensGrandad]

Irrespective of what they can legally do or not it is my contention that they shouldnt be able to do that and if needed the law should be changed, that is the whole point of this thread.

 

[LVGull]

Irrespective of what they can legally do or not it is my contention that they shouldnt be able to do that and if needed the law should be changed, that is the whole point of this thread.

Give us a clue then

 

[The Clamp]

I believe that these should be made illegal for workers.

If a person is laid off because the firm have no work it is not the fault of the worker but that of the employer for (a) not finding sufficient work (b) not making provisions for quiet times. Most employees have regular financial commitment that they cannot avoid ie rent or mortgage council tax etc How can they pay that if they are laid off for 2 or 3 days in a week? I believe that when somebody is employed it should be a financial commitment that the employer is forced to honour.

Didn't you used to run pubs? You seriously telling me, in the pub trade, you never took on any casual staff?

 

[Jack Daniels]

I believe that these should be made illegal for workers.

If a person is laid off because the firm have no work it is not the fault of the worker but that of the employer for (a) not finding sufficient work (b) not making provisions for quiet times. Most employees have regular financial commitment that they cannot avoid ie rent or mortgage council tax etc How can they pay that if they are laid off for 2 or 3 days in a week? I believe that when somebody is employed it should be a financial commitment that the employer is forced to honour.

When will people realise that jobs are created by the company needing a person to solve a problem. Not to provide a constant soource of income to a person. People's personal curmstances are of little consequence to company unless the person's value warrants it.



Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[BensGrandad]

Didn't you used to run pubs? You seriously telling me, in the pub trade, you never took on any casual staff?

I tried not to, but that is totally different as I would take on staff to do a specific duty or event and no other. I didnt say to my full time or part time bar staff it is February which is always quiet so I dont need you today. I would encourage them to take their winter holiday during those months but at no time would I lay therm off and expect them to still be there when we got busy again.

 

[Jack Daniels]

Is it the workers fault that rhe boss has taken on 20 people during the busy time to earn money and only needs 2 at quiet times?

Providing two weeks work for 18 people that had daytime tv or playstation lined up for those two weeks. Shocking.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[The Clamp]

I tried not to, but that is totally different as I would take on staff to do a specific duty or event and no other. I didnt say to my full time or part time bar staff it is February which is always quiet so I dont need you today. I would encourage them to take their winter holiday during those months but at no time would I lay therm off and expect them to still be there when we got busy again.

So you did and you're talking shit. Well done.

 

[beorhthelm]

You are all getting the wrong angle of this or misinterpreting my view. I am not talking of staff that are taken on for a specific need as in a pub who advertise for a barmaid who must be prepared to do Friday and Saturday but firms that employ somebody full time 5 days a week in what ever job and then turn around and say to the worker we have no work for you today or tomorrow. Consequently they receive no pay through no fault of theirs

No full time on PAYE paid either weekly or monthly. I think it is wrong that the firm can just say sorry we have no work to morrow so dont need you.

full time is defined as 30 hours or more, so isnt zero hours. and you cannot just say dont come in tomorrow, you need to give notice probably a week to a month.

 

[Jack Daniels]

After reading this comment i'd say these companies should not be in business if they can't afford to employ full time staff.
I agree it should be abolished as many companies are abusing the system and it's all about what suits these companies.
We now live in a society where employees are just numbers and this is all to common when the population rises.

Businesses that need temporary labour during busy periods, should not be in business?

Come again. I think I misunderstood.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[BensGrandad]

So you did and you're talking shit. Well done.

Where did I say I did or even suggest that. I can tell you of the latest only example: when at my pub in Midhurst we employed a customers wife as a kitchen assistant for the duration of Goodwood week 5 days she knew and wanted that. It was the only time and totally different to what I am saying about.

 

[BensGrandad]

full time is defined as 30 hours or more, so isnt zero hours. and you cannot just say dont come in tomorrow, you need to give notice probably a week to a month.

That is exactly what I am saying and even then giving a weeks notice is to unacceptable.

 

[beorhthelm]

Businesses that need temporary labour during busy periods, should not be in business?

Come again. I think I misunderstood.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

the misunderstanding is not yours. there are people around that seem to think that jobs exist to fullfill a need to employ people and that the only model of employment is 5 days a week ~9-5ish. preferably with overtime available whenever they need it, but never at the behest of the employer.

 

[darkwolf666]

I have a full time job now but have had a zero hours contract with another company for a couple of years as well as a full time job. When I was laid off last year from that full time job the zero hours one came into its own, helping me keep my head above water. Now I'm in full time work I still pick up a few shifts a month on my zero hours job which pays for the little extras in life. For me that zero hours job has been very convenient, both being a life saver when I was out of full time work and a handy extra income now. They're not great for everyone but they do work in some circumstances. Depends on the scruples of the employer.

Unfortunately your last sentence sums up the problem all too succinctly.

 

[Jack Daniels]

Can't wait for the book to come out. 'Labour & Resource Planning' 'A Guide to Timely & Efficent Recruitment, Retention & Contracts' by Bensgrandad.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[beorhthelm]

That is exactly what I am saying and even then giving a weeks notice is to unacceptable.

suggest you change the title and first post then, to "short notice periods" and edit the 2-3 days laid off part as you seem to have reversed ferret.