The Tory response to all comments about Zero Hours contacts is this: But what about those people who like the arrangement?? (Screw anybody who wants a mortgage or even a Life...)
I am pretty sure that Miliband and David Axelrod will paint this (Tory) attitude as part of their Wet Dream Strategy to create low wages, neutered trade unions, record profits, soaring executive pay. The strategy has succeeded! I am sure the Tories are patting themselves on the back.
What could possibly go wrong? It's not like we have a General Election looming or anything.....
Zero hours just means an employee is “on-call” without a minimum amount of weekly work specified in the contract.
Mortgage experts said, like the self-employed, aspiring home owners’ options will be extremely limited while on these contracts. This is because lenders look for a history of income to prove the borrower can afford a loan; a prolonged period of low earnings on this type of contract can delay first-time buyers’ plans.
There were 583,000 employees on zero-hour contracts in the UK at the end of 2013, up from 143,000 in 2008, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
I'm not fuming about zero-hour contracts because I know they're not as bad as made out by the media. What I do find strange is how zero-hour contracts weren't a concern for 20 years, and now hardly a week goes by when you don't hear about it.
Exactly, I was one of those who was on Zero hour contract for a number of years with all the entitlements I even got redundancy pay twice from the same company. I have a feeling the reason we hear about it negatively now is because the public sector has started using it to avoid long term contacts and getting tided up with people who are useless. ;-) Such a shame these people can't have jobs for life at the expense of the tax payer any more.
Exactly, I was one of those who was on Zero hour contract for a number of years with all the entitlements I even got redundancy pay twice from the same company. I have a feeling the reason we hear about it negatively now is because the public sector has started using it to avoid long term contacts and getting tided up with people who are useless. ;-) Such a shame these people can't have jobs for life at the expense of the tax payer any more.
Don't know, the fact remains IMHO that as soon as the civil servant feels the pressure it goes for the kill, there are people like myself who worked for the private sector on ZHCs all saying the same thing, which is we were paid holiday pay, sick pay and hours offered were suited to our needs, but it seams that these testimonials are not good for those with an agenda no one seams to want to hear that! Why?
Don't know, the fact remains IMHO that as soon as the civil servant feels the pressure it goes for the kill, there are people like myself who worked for the private sector on ZHCs all saying the same thing, which is we were paid holiday pay, sick pay and hours offered were suited to our needs, but it seams that these testimonials are not good for those with an agenda no one seams to want to hear that! Why?
Dont think its anything to do with the public sector not liking it, its more that these contract can and do have a very negitive effect on peoples lives, and are really only good for people who dont need a regular income, There were 583,000 employees on zero-hour contracts in the UK at the end of 2013, up from 143,000 in 2008, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).So i would say 20 years ago would have been very small numbers.
I wonder why this wasn't Labour policy in the year 2000 when the percentage of people on zero-hour contracts was higher than it is now.
Labour does not have policies, the people running it do.
Blair was a rather uncaring individual at heart. What he wanted was obviously not a fairer Britain, in fact he always seemed to me to hate everything about Britain and wished to make us into an America clone.
I wonder why this wasn't Labour policy in the year 2000 when the percentage of people on zero-hour contracts was higher than it is now.
There were 583,000 employees on zero-hour contracts in the UK at the end of 2013, up from 143,000 in 2008, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
Thus ensuring people will work zero hours and back to suckling on the state's tit
Precisely where Millipede wants them
That happens anyway. As much in welfare is handed out to those in employment as those not in employment. That's your taxes, my taxes and billions of borrowed money subsiding employers who use zero hours contracts as a means of circumnavigating basic employment law.
There is absolutely no justification that I can see for a business like Sports Direct which operates fixed weekly store hours having its entire part time workforce on zero hour contracts.
Guess it's either settle for Miliband's promise or nothing at all.......
It's pointless to compare now with 20 years ago, different times and different state of economy. People were working in very different conditions to now.
Personally I think why it's a hot subject today, is because like someone has said, that employers are avoiding full time employment because it'll cost less in wages and taxes. Also the amount of pay recieved is not enough to live on due to the high cost of living. Sure maybe some people have had good experiences with these types of arrangements but there's a large number who don't.
* have a right to compensation if shifts are cancelled at short notice
You do realise that should a person attend the work place they have to be paid the minimum wage - even if there is no work.
* have "clarity" from their employer about their employment status, terms and conditions
The Labour Party (and the Conservative Party) have refused to create 'clarity' in the workplace despite decades of the courts asking for it.
* have the right to request a contract with a "minimum amount of work" after six months with an employer - this could only be refused if employers could prove their business could not operate any other way
* have an automatic right to a fixed-hours contract after 12 months with an employer[/I]
[/I]
You already have this - case law has shown that where the actions of the parties involved diverge from the written contracts - the courts can construct a notional contract - or in other words - if they act as if the worker is a full -time employee then that is what they are.
The only thing Milliband is offering is to avoid the need to go to court to prove it.
The problem is how do you apply a limit that the companies would just work around?
Introducing a 12 month limit after which the contact becomes fixed hours will just mean a lot of people getting binned at the end of twelve months and fresh faces taken on
Employers who use these awful zero hour contracts will simply employ people for a six month contract period, then get rid of them, so negating any chance of said employee asking for guaranteed hours.
Ed is playing to the cheap seats on this one.
yep.
law of unintended consequences. if your rights kick in after a year. your job ends after 11 months.
Comments
The Tory response to all comments about Zero Hours contacts is this:
But what about those people who like the arrangement?? (Screw anybody who wants a mortgage or even a Life...)
I am pretty sure that Miliband and David Axelrod will paint this (Tory) attitude as part of their Wet Dream Strategy to create low wages, neutered trade unions, record profits, soaring executive pay. The strategy has succeeded! I am sure the Tories are patting themselves on the back.
What could possibly go wrong? It's not like we have a General Election looming or anything.....
1. People having to use holidays for Xmas and new year.
2. Agency workers working alongside full tim but on lower wages.
Judge people by what they do, not what they say.
Again, you assume everybody on Zero Hours contracts is exploited by them...?
Why.. ?
Depends what you mean exploited,
I wasn't the one who first used the word.
Jol44 is the one accusing all ZH contracts of being universally exploitative.
We'll tackle scandalous zero hour contracts', says Farage in pitch for working class vote
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/471010/We-ll-tackle-scandalous-zero-hour-contracts-says-Farage-in-pitch-for-working-class-vote
But in some ways he is right, beacuse they are effecting people in big way and are on the increase, stopping people being able to get a mortgage is a very big effect, and when more people are being put on ZHC it cannot be a good thing.http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CEQQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Ffinance%2Fpersonalfinance%2Fborrowing%2Fmortgages%2F10698462%2FZero-hour-mortgage-problems-bar-first-time-buyers.html&ei=AB5cU-vqMMHjPKXlgbAP&usg=AFQjCNGJl_OF_fMvR-8GnAnaQ8Uwsc5rPw&bvm=bv.65397613,d.ZWU&cad=rja. The rapid rise of “zero-hour contracts” is making it even harder for young people to step on to the property ladder, mortgage brokers have warned.
Zero hours just means an employee is “on-call” without a minimum amount of weekly work specified in the contract.
Mortgage experts said, like the self-employed, aspiring home owners’ options will be extremely limited while on these contracts. This is because lenders look for a history of income to prove the borrower can afford a loan; a prolonged period of low earnings on this type of contract can delay first-time buyers’ plans.
There were 583,000 employees on zero-hour contracts in the UK at the end of 2013, up from 143,000 in 2008, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
You can promise the world in opposition. Judge people by what they do in power.
And what is this government doing about it saying the number of people on ZHC is increasing under this government.
Labour were in power. We judged them.
Exactly, I was one of those who was on Zero hour contract for a number of years with all the entitlements I even got redundancy pay twice from the same company. I have a feeling the reason we hear about it negatively now is because the public sector has started using it to avoid long term contacts and getting tided up with people who are useless. ;-) Such a shame these people can't have jobs for life at the expense of the tax payer any more.
And how many people 20 years ago were on ZHC
Don't know, the fact remains IMHO that as soon as the civil servant feels the pressure it goes for the kill, there are people like myself who worked for the private sector on ZHCs all saying the same thing, which is we were paid holiday pay, sick pay and hours offered were suited to our needs, but it seams that these testimonials are not good for those with an agenda no one seams to want to hear that! Why?
I suspect they will be under Labour, will employers binning people prior to the 12 month limit and just cycling people round between similar companies
Dont think its anything to do with the public sector not liking it, its more that these contract can and do have a very negitive effect on peoples lives, and are really only good for people who dont need a regular income, There were 583,000 employees on zero-hour contracts in the UK at the end of 2013, up from 143,000 in 2008, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).So i would say 20 years ago would have been very small numbers.
Labour does not have policies, the people running it do.
Blair was a rather uncaring individual at heart. What he wanted was obviously not a fairer Britain, in fact he always seemed to me to hate everything about Britain and wished to make us into an America clone.
There were 583,000 employees on zero-hour contracts in the UK at the end of 2013, up from 143,000 in 2008, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
That happens anyway. As much in welfare is handed out to those in employment as those not in employment. That's your taxes, my taxes and billions of borrowed money subsiding employers who use zero hours contracts as a means of circumnavigating basic employment law.
There is absolutely no justification that I can see for a business like Sports Direct which operates fixed weekly store hours having its entire part time workforce on zero hour contracts.
Guess it's either settle for Miliband's promise or nothing at all.......
It's pointless to compare now with 20 years ago, different times and different state of economy. People were working in very different conditions to now.
Personally I think why it's a hot subject today, is because like someone has said, that employers are avoiding full time employment because it'll cost less in wages and taxes. Also the amount of pay recieved is not enough to live on due to the high cost of living. Sure maybe some people have had good experiences with these types of arrangements but there's a large number who don't.
You do realise that should a person attend the work place they have to be paid the minimum wage - even if there is no work.
The Labour Party (and the Conservative Party) have refused to create 'clarity' in the workplace despite decades of the courts asking for it.
You already have this - case law has shown that where the actions of the parties involved diverge from the written contracts - the courts can construct a notional contract - or in other words - if they act as if the worker is a full -time employee then that is what they are.
The only thing Milliband is offering is to avoid the need to go to court to prove it.
They should be limited at best.
There's no reason why the likes of Sports Direct should have the bulk of their workers on them.
The problem is how do you apply a limit that the companies would just work around?
Introducing a 12 month limit after which the contact becomes fixed hours will just mean a lot of people getting binned at the end of twelve months and fresh faces taken on
yep.
law of unintended consequences. if your rights kick in after a year. your job ends after 11 months.
Holding people 'on-call' without any form of remuneration should be made unlawful imo.
This Government have massaged the employment figures by encouraging zero hour contracts and bogus self-employment.