Options
Camerons '1000 new jobs per day' are all zero hours
alanwarwic
Posts: 28,396 Forum Member
✭✭✭
Cameron on pmq has caimed there are 1000 new jobs per day whilst the Guardian has just reported 1000+ new zero hours jobs per day.
Do we now join the dots to claim we have a new job revolution,all being zero hours?
Do we now join the dots to claim we have a new job revolution,all being zero hours?
0
Comments
http://www.beverleyguardian.co.uk/news/national/zero-hours-contracts-rise-to-1-8m-1-7125194
"The number of zero-hours contracts has increased from 1.4 million to 1.8 million, new figures have revealed.....
"The findings today that there are now 1.8 million zero-hours contracts and that the number of people reporting they are on a zero-hours contract for their main job has risen by almost 20% is yet another stark illustration of a recovery which is not working for working people."
University and College Union general secretary Sally Hunt said: " The use of zero-hours and other forms of casualised contracts in education is one of the great scandals of our time. Without a proper contract staff cannot plan their lives on a month-to-month or even a week-to-week basis.""
So August 2013 to February 2015 we have 800,000 new Zero hours contracts, that also making for over 500,000+ per year.
Just because you are on Zero Hour contract doesn't mean that you are doing zero hours per day. Zero is the minimum not the maximum.
There are also many non-ZHC jobs being created. I started a new job in December as my sector is picking up and I'm certainly working more than zero hours per day.
Conversely, you can technically have zero unemployment if everyone was on a zero hours contract and usually working zero hours.
There were 608,000 more people in work compared to previous year (ONS)
There were 113,000 additional people employed on zero hour contracts compared to the previous year (ONS) [caveat - It is not possible to say how much of the increase between 2013 and 2014 is due to greater recognition rather than new contracts]
As a maximum, ZHC's account for 18.6% of all new people in work since last year.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jan/19/british-families-poor-society-income-level-cost-of-living-benefit-cuts
Also how many of said jobs created, will require in work benefits?
Probably a lot - but surely the good news is that the total benefits bill is being reduced? IOW, if these people weren't in work, we'd be paying more in benefits...
But is the benefit bill going down, well lets see what the government said people who do the right thing will be looked after. So freezing in work means tested benefits is looking after people people. And now giving working people punishments if they dont work enough hours or earn enough money.
The benefits bill is only falling back to the same level as it was in 2008, it's not really a reduction per say. However there's lot less income tax coming in than needed.
Also many are in self employment and 35% of them are earning less than £10000 a year, compared to 20% in 2008.
There's also no policies to reduce in work benefits from any of the parties too.
'As and when' employment and job sharing are the future.
It just another Tory attempt to massage the unemployment figures like they did in the 80s putting everyone on sickness benefits.
I certainly couldn't work a zero hours contract. It would make me ill not know how much money I might have from one week to the next. Or not know when I was going to have to go in to work.
Any company that uses these in this way should be disbanded.
Spot on. Thanks to Labour this is the future - overpopulation, cheap labour and under employment. At least the Tories don't pretend to care.
Most will be on benefits as well anyway
So what sort of contract should a business such as a restaurant, theatre or events company use when they need extra staff for busy periods?
There is a good case for better regulating their use but they do work well for many people (students, mothers of young children and the semi-retired) who like the flexibility that they offer. If you banned ZHCs then you'd just go back to a system of casual labour and people working cash in hand.
But not wholly on benefits.
But we have flexiblity laws they came in last year for everyone has the right to ask to go on flexable working. And flexibilly rules are not the same as ZHC http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fbusiness-28078690&ei=YxvuVKrtJIGpUv_WgpgB&usg=AFQjCNHOtctbFU13K7zX3vP1TTZoJnSIXg&bvm=bv.86956481,d.d24&cad=rja Every employee now has the right to request flexible working hours after the government extended the right previously reserved for carers and those looking after children.
So as far as you are concerned, companies should be forced to organise their business organisation around your personal working preferences?
Does that not depend if they are getting the hours, because if not they will be on more benefits as the benefit cap does not apply to working people.
Well the idea is meant to benefit both parties, unless you belive they should only benefit the employer.
Work should be there for us, not us there for work.
If businesses were organised around koantemplation's working preferences they would never open their doors. He has said multiple times on these pages that he doesn't want a job.
Work should exist because there's a demand for whatever it is that the work is producing. Anything else is a sham.