Zero Hours Contracts

[mikey4444]

At last the truth is beginning to creep out ::::

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23570345

I was listening to the Today program this morning and a care worker was being interviewed. She said, amongst other things, that she wasn't paid for her time travelling between her patients and that this resulted in her total pay being below the minimum wage. How can this be allowed ? Minimum wage laws were brought in to stop this kind of exploitation of workers.

It would seem to me that the whole issue of zero hours contracts should be looked at with some urgency, with a view to outlawing them asap.

[factor-fiction]

Like Eddie I'm an agency worker and effectively on a zero hours contract. Like eddie, I can turn down work and sometimes do but only in exceptional circumstances as the agency would stop contacting me if I did it too often. It suits me now but wouldn't have done 20 years ago.
But I thought zero hours workers COULD legally turn down assignments. Am I mistaken?

[Hypognosis]

@pixie

//Carers aren't in the job expecting to make money,which, maybe, doesn't help. //

Well, I'm torn. You do yourself credit just by doing that kind of work an my instinct is to encourage people in your position to stand up for yourself and get what you're truly worth. But... at the same time... I don't want the world beating me over the head for being the one who made care for the elderly as expensive as it needs to be to pay care staff a decent wage.

Remember, in most permanent jobs, people have all manner of creative ways of preventing thumb-twiddling or any appearance of being idle. "Work expands to fill the time available for its completion", as the saying has it. You don't have such luxuries.

[pixie373]

No, exactly. But i think my sister and i made the right decision to work for ourselves and cut out the "middle-man". We now get similar to what an agency would charge, rather than a third. And it doesn't cost the client any extra. Plus, obviously, better continuing care.

[EDDIE51]

this link was posted recently by Buildersmate it is worth reading
http://www.freelanceadvisor.co.uk/legal-advice/what-are-zero-hours-contracts/
You CAN legally turn down work on a zero hours contract.
The situation as it is is very near slavery.

[factor-fiction]

I'm not sure why it's akin to slavery though Eddie especially if they can turn down work. I don't feel like a slave. I can work for several agencies if I want. Surely a zero hours worker can have two or more employers or sign up with an agency too

[EDDIE51]

FF many people interviewed on the radio discussion said that they were on zero hour contracts but the employers made it clear that they were expected to take every job offered and to always be available . Look at Pixie's comment , she has to give 28 days written notice if she wants to take a days holiday, from a ZERO hour contract !
Zero hours should mean what it says and what it was meant to do neither side is under an obligation to work or offer work.

[LazyGun]

There is evidence to suggest that a great number of the estimated 1 million workers in the UK on zero hour contracts are being made to sign so-called "exclusive" zero-hour contracts, where they are contractually prevented from working for another employer.

It is this type of contract in particular that is of serious concern...

[Hypognosis]

Someone on the BBC news made a comparison to the way that Dock workers used to be treated.

My understanding is that the business of hiring and firing at the gates was a means to instil discipline. If you ever expressed the thought out loud that it was always the bosses' cronies getting hired day-in, day-out, then it's likely that you were one of the perceived 'troublemakers' who they are trying to keep in line - by only hiring you when workload got desperate.

Given that dockers were prone to settling their scores physically, the need for discipline is clear. But it seems rather heavy-handed to apply similar tactics to everything from admin to care staff.

@factor-fiction

I'd like to know how someone can be signed to multiple contracts without breaching their T&Cs. You would expect part of the idea of a contract is to make the employee sign away their ability to make themselves available to any other employer. No?

At employer's beck and call = not available to seek work = no JSA, would be my understanding of the situation.

[237SJ]

Zero hours contracts have always existed. I have friends who have been contractors and were earning upwards of £250 per day (and that was about 8 years ago). The company that they contract for can give them work from 1 to 5 days per week. This saves the company a lot of money because there is no sick pay, no holiday pay, no maternity or employers` pensions contributions. My friends registered themselves as self employed when they were contractors. The problem arises when people contract for agencies who exploit them which seems to be a growing problem. I can see why Vince Cable has felt the need to highlight these working practices to prevent them becoming mainstream.

[EDDIE51]

Lazygun , that is what people on the radio said, the employers were telling them they could not be on more than one contract and they had to be available anytime and all hours even if there was no work for several weeks.
Now that is close to slavery.
If you read my link this is illegal there can not be an 'exclusive' contract that does not allow the worker to work for others and turn down work.

[EDDIE51]

237SJ you are getting 'self employed' and Zero hour contract mixed up, read my link it explains the differences.

[LazyGun]

@ Eddie I agree with you - such exclusive contracts bring the term "wage slave" a whole lot closer to reality.

[Old_Geezer]

I'm unsure why zero hour contracts are even allowed. It is the modern day equivalent of the boss coming out to the factory gates and saying to the crowd, "I'll have you, you, and you, today, the rest can go home". I thought we'd left those days where folk were just resource, way behind, generations past: that we were more civilised now. Apparently not. Amazing how the right to decent treatment, fought hard for over many years, can just be worked around by those that think they have a right to treat others however they wish.

[woofgang]

OG please read my post on page one. Zero hours contracts CAN be used in ways which benefit both employer and employee.

[Old_Geezer]

Can, can never be good enough. People should know they have permanent employment. Or if it suits them, join a temping agency.

[woofgang]

they have another option which is to decline to work for firms that only offer zero hours contracts....

[Old_Geezer]

They can, but that doesn't close the loophole that allows firms to exploit people. And if folk refuse any type of work aren't they labelled workshy ? Even when it's a case of, we'll keep you under contract and maybe not even give you any work/income ? This loophole is wrong in principle. I can see a desire for/to be temporary staff but it should be better controlled than allowing such a free-for-all. People, especially vulnerable ones as they have no job, deserve more than that.

[jake-the-peg]

Will people lose jobseeker benfits if they decline to work zero hours contracts?

[pixie373]

We weren't told it was a zero hours contract until the meeting before our first day. By then, people had handed in their notice and left their last jobs (and paid for enhanced CRB check, which wasn't paid back until you'd worked there a month).

[pixie373]

I don't think they do lose them, jtp. The reason we had to pay for our police checks until we'd worked there a month, was because the agency were paying a fortune in police checks for people who had no intention of ever working there. They were attending interviews just to be able to keep their benefits and show they "tried".