PeteMorris Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 I would also draw peoples attention to the full report cited on here as being conclusive statistical evidence that things are hunky dory in the world of ZHC's https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/zero-hours-contracts_2013-myth-reality_tcm18-10710.pdf Oh and I might be wrong, but the organisation 'does' appear to me, to be somewhat biased in favour of the employers. And it's an old report from 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 I merely pointed out that (with the link) that I'm not the only person who thinks ZHC are bad....And although I don't agree with most of Jeremy Corbyn's ideas...He's also talking about banning them...(Although I think his motives are different to mine). Also, I just noticed your much quoted survey is dated 2013...Is it still relevant? four years later? Given the much documented increase in their use? I'd support any legislation aimed at stamping out practices like my OH had to endure. Be it punitive actions against employers or banning ZHC's...Or any other useful idea. ---------- Post added 07-03-2017 at 15:13 ---------- The problem there Bob, is that anyone who works for a company that routinely abuses ZHC workers, if the the employee baulks at any aspect of it, and tries to stand up for their 'rights'...The job mysteriously vanishes..I've seen it happen. Any dissent results in no contract. Yes, that's entirely illegal, but it happens.... I agree with repeal of some of the anti-trade union laws...They are now tied and toothless...The pendulum has swung too far in favour of the employer, and it could do with redressing. Similarly, there are laws to prevent an employer banning unions within their organisation..But we all know that happens too... So you propose to ban a legal and useful practise to stop other practises which are already illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Probably from the same reasoning that you dared to say that I was being daft...? Seriously though - if people are attacking your arguments and you cannot find a way of refuting them perhaps you might consider that your arguments are flawed? I'm still waiting for a reasoned argument that ZHC's are inherently bad. Apart from NZ which operates in a different labour market considerably to the UK and EU, I've not seen anything, nor even an explanation of why NZ have banned them.... Not really...Because it's the same old suspects that arrive to deride any discussion I have on here...It's very familiar... Why would 'I' have to come up with an argument why NZ banned ZHC?...They did, and there must have been a valid reason, otherwise it wouldn't have happened. Or was it a quiet day in parliament and they didn't have anything better to do? Oh and I called your silly comparisons with young drivers 'daft'...And I stick by it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 I would also draw peoples attention to the full report cited on here as being conclusive statistical evidence that things are hunky dory in the world of ZHC's https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/zero-hours-contracts_2013-myth-reality_tcm18-10710.pdf Oh and I might be wrong, but the organisation 'does' appear to me, to be somewhat biased in favour of the employers. And it's an old report from 2013 Let me just snip from the conclusions of that something which appears to be relevant to your issues... "Overall, our findings from both our survey of employers and survey of zero-hours contract workers suggest that in the majority of instances, zero-hours workers are not obliged to accept work and are not penalised by their organisation when they turn work down." ---------- Post added 07-03-2017 at 15:32 ---------- Not really...Because it's the same old suspects that arrive to deride any discussion I have on here...It's very familiar... Why would 'I' have to come up with an argument why NZ banned ZHC?...They did, and there must have been a valid reason, otherwise it wouldn't have happened. Or was it a quiet day in parliament and they didn't have anything better to do? Oh and I called your silly comparisons with young drivers 'daft'...And I stick by it.... So it's an appeal to authority then? Or perhaps an appeal to populism? Either way it's a logical fallacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 So you propose to ban a legal and useful practise to stop other practises which are already illegal. Clearly the law can't protect employees with the law in it's current form, so something needs to change. Did you read the full report? Is the data valid after 4 years, and with the huge spike in the use of ZHC's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 and with the huge spike in the use of ZHC's? Evidence for this spike...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Clearly the law can't protect employees with the law in it's current form, so something needs to change. Have you considered that what is at fault is Police/CPS policy rather than the law itself. Or perhaps that people are ignorant of the law so an information campaign would do the job. There's no case here that I can see for new legislation. Convince me otherwise. Did you read the full report? Is the data valid after 4 years, and with the huge spike in the use of ZHC's? Obviously it is. Now if it were 40 years old you might have a point. Do you have any more recent data which contradicts it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Clearly the law can't protect employees with the law in it's current form, so something needs to change. Hang on is Mike Ashley not being brought to book then? Did we imagine all the hulabaloo and the Parlimentary enquiries and the investigations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Let me just snip from the conclusions of that something which appears to be relevant to your issues... "Overall, our findings from both our survey of employers and survey of zero-hours contract workers suggest that in the majority of instances, zero-hours workers are not obliged to accept work and are not penalised by their organisation when they turn work down." ---------- Post added 07-03-2017 at 15:32 ---------- So it's an appeal to authority then? Or perhaps an appeal to populism? Either way it's a logical fallacy. Neither you or anyone else has answered my question. Is the data valid after 4 years?...Given the numbers have changed since 2013 Have you read the report where there are quite sizeable numbers negative to your stance that everything is rosy red and hunky-dory? Off hand try reading page 5 of the 46 page report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Neither you or anyone else has answered my question. Is the data valid after 4 years?...Given the numbers have changed since 2013 Have you read the report where there are quite sizeable numbers negative to your stance that everything is rosy red and hunky-dory? Off hand try reading page 5 of the 46 page report. Do you intent to persist in misrepresenting my position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now