More 0 hours workers than ever..

[PeteMorris]

I can understand the use of zhc at a big hotel, I can even understand a phone call at 7.30 saying "come in now" but I don't understand being told you aren't needed when you've got there.

 

Well I assure you, it happened on no less than 3 occasions. Not only was that irritating, but I used to drop her off on 'my' way to work...and didn't have time to take her back home first, so it actually cost us money in bus fares.

[sgtkate]

If you are going to walk into this assuming that I'm doing from greed then I'm not even going to bother debating it with you.

 

I was being flippant, but I'd genuinely like to hear a reason for using ZHCs when the staff would prefer a fixed hours contract.

[Obelix]

The staff that are on them don't want to be on a fixed hours contract though.

 

I think you are coming at this from the wrong angle and assuming that ZHC are always bad when that isn't the case.

[sgtkate]

The staff that are on them don't want to be on a fixed hours contract though.

 

I think you are coming at this from the wrong angle and assuming that ZHC are always bad when that isn't the case.

 

No I'm not, if you look at my previous posts, I said outright that they shouldn't be banned at all, but they need to be made so that a business owner who is using them to cover poor planning and decision making can't use them. The problem is how do you identify those who do want to be on them and those who don't. A lot of the people who are on them not through choice are likely to be desperate and therefore unlikely to complain to an employer who can sack them without any reason in the first 6 months...hard one to fix.

[tinfoilhat]

Well I assure you, it happened on no less than 3 occasions. Not only was that irritating, but I used to drop her off on 'my' way to work...and didn't have time to take her back home first, so it actually cost us money in bus fares.

 

I don't doubt you Pete - the way you see a lot of them run and a lot of the stuff that goes on behind he scenes make you want to go camping!

[Mister M]

Perhaps there are highly skilled consultants in IT and various other professions who quite like the idea of doing a bit, here and there, and a zero hours contract suits them fine.

 

However it's worth bearing in mind in these discussions that according to the TUC, the typical UK employee earns 50% more an hour than the typical worker on a zero-hours contract (https://www.tuc.org.uk/economic-issues/labour-market/zero-hours-contracts-have-become-easy-way-employ-staff-cheap-says-tuc).

[Obelix]

No I'm not, if you look at my previous posts, I said outright that they shouldn't be banned at all, but they need to be made so that a business owner who is using them to cover poor planning and decision making can't use them.

 

Contrary to what some people think, work doesn't flow endless and gently into a company in a constant stream, fit to be doled out in neat portions to workers who get a constant number of hours every week.

 

If I get offered a piece work for say a business closure to manage, or some bonus that people need to invest then I get slapped with perhaps 40% more work than the regular staff can handle. I can therefore turn down the work with loss of goodwill and income. Require existing staff to work an extra 40% OT which is going to produce poor work at that level of overwork. Or I can call up my little arm of ZHC and "advertise" the work to them. Some will take it, some won't they may or may not cover it all but the work gets done with no waiting, my existing staff may have a few hours overtime they can absorb, and the ZHC get some income.

 

Happens every two or three weeks I guess. As to why they are on ZHC who knows. I offer them fixed term salaries and regular work - mostly they are not interested in doing it. Most of them also have ZHC with other employers as well. So that's how it works and everyone is more or less happy. Except J C it seems. Because I'm obviously such an exploitative git for paying people quite a lot of money...

[PeteMorris]

I don't doubt you Pete - the way you see a lot of them run and a lot of the stuff that goes on behind he scenes make you want to go camping!

 

I felt so sorry for her on many occasions. She would come out of there utterly exhausted and mentally and physically drained, and crying. I kept telling her not to go...I'd have been happy for her to walk away from it. But she has a strong work ethic, and doesn't like to be 'beaten'...but I've no doubt, had she stayed there, she would have had some kind of breakdown.

[unbeliever]

Perhaps there are highly skilled consultants in IT and various other professions who quite like the idea of doing a bit, here and there, and a zero hours contract suits them fine.

 

However it's worth bearing in mind in these discussions that according to the TUC, the typical UK employee earns 50% more an hour than the typical worker on a zero-hours contract (https://www.tuc.org.uk/economic-issues/labour-market/zero-hours-contracts-have-become-easy-way-employ-staff-cheap-says-tuc).

 

That's a highly biased statistic. ZHCs are more common in lower paid work.

[Obelix]

Perhaps there are highly skilled consultants in IT and various other professions who quite like the idea of doing a bit, here and there, and a zero hours contract suits them fine.

 

However it's worth bearing in mind in these discussions that according to the TUC, the typical UK employee earns 50% more an hour than the typical worker on a zero-hours contract (https://www.tuc.org.uk/economic-issues/labour-market/zero-hours-contracts-have-become-easy-way-employ-staff-cheap-says-tuc).

 

And the TUC don't cherry pick data at all....

 

If the TUC compared the typical ZHC to those in similar employment then it's be worth something. But otherwise you are going to lump in all the high earning people who very rarely if ever have ZHC's.

 

It's a meaningless measure produced purely for political grandstanding by the TUC. It's worthless