To ask what is so bad about zero hour contracts

[Idontlikecheesecake]

I know there’s a lot of controversy about them and the government want to get rid of them, but they’ve always worked for me. Ive always had contracted hours and then had a zero hours contract as an extra. They paid weekly so they helped me budget with monthly pay. I could do an extra shift i wanted to, and i didnt have to if i didnt want to. Last year i walked out of a job, and the zero hours contract i had was the only thing that kept me going until i started new employment 3 months later.

I get that they don’t have pensions, many don’t pay holiday and some places don’t offer enough hours (that was why I registered with a few agencies). But surely a contract that says you may get some work in line with your availability is better than nothing at all?

Because what happens when they decide they don't need you for three weeks and you have no income?

Yep, that. For example, I have two shifts this week, none next week then one the week after. It is hard to live with, and you can't really budget for anything because you don't know how much you'll have coming in.

I love zero hours am not bound to be penalised for only working whenever I feel up for working.. Don't want to work for 3 weeks or 5months no problem!.. Want to work everyday of the month no problem! Not going to be sacked for illness as I choose the amount I work.. Work fits around my life and not the other way round. Would be so annoyed if they stopped!!

Because some employers take advantage. I have seen employers threaten colleagues with no hours if they don't agree to the crappy hours the manager wants them to do.

They can be great and I have employed seasonal workers on them. Unfortunately they are more likely to be used to treat staff like shit.

I think k they work for some people and in some circumstances. I'm on a zero hours contract and it's perfect for me. I'm not the main earner so rent and bills would always be paid. I can be off if my son is ill, I don't work in school holidays except the odd day if my son is out and if I'm feeling tired (medical condition) I can stay home.
They don't work well if you rely on the money.

people on low income cant apply for housing benefit,they say you can but thats a load of bull.Each time your shift changes your benefits are stopped for 4 weeks wile they adjust to the change as your hours keeps changing it keeps getting held back.

you cant get a mortgage

good luck saving when your hours change one week to the next

some people turn up to work only to be told no work for you today

it wouldn't be so bad if only a few employers go for it but most of them do meaning desperate people who need work have no choice but to apply

They're flexible if you aren't relying on them as your only source of income. If they are your only source of income and you're expected to take every shift you're offered then it isn't sustainable, particularly with the current benefits model.

But surely a contract that says you may get some work in line with your availability is better than nothing at all?

This is basically the issue - yes, its better than nothing at all, but it does not allow people to budget as they are not aware of how much they will be paid each month. It would be fine if the zero hour contract was a "top up" to a normal job, but for many, this is their main source of income.

FWIW, I was on a zero hour contract with an agency for 2 years and did alright. I was lucky as I was in an industry which had a shortages of workers and I was good at my job so got calls every day. But a lot of others were not so lucky.

In many places if you reject work you are penalised by not being offered shifts the next time.

They used to be used for jobs like xmas temps in shops & that worked ok for most people. Now loads of minimum wage type jobs ( shops, pubs etc) use them for all staff and treat them terribly. I know people that have been down to work on a rota, arrived at work only to be told they are not needed for that shift and sent home, hours changed with minutes notice. How do you budget if you have no idea how much you will earn? Or think you will earn x amount & then you only get to work half? Most zero hour contracts also require you to be ready and able to work at any time, do you can’t even have another job. How can a top up benefit system work with that?
They were never meant to be used for people’s proper, long term jobs.

They're great in theory - work when you're available and don't work when you're not - but they've been co-opted by employers with less than scrupulous business practices and in many instances are used against the employees they're supposed to be benefiting.

Pissed off your tin-pot dictator of a supervisor simply by existing? There go all your shifts for the next week.

Can't work Monday morning because your kid has a hospital appointment? Kiss the rest of your shifts goodbye then because only team players get hours.

Keep getting all the crappy shifts on days that you've said you can't work? Suck it up, buttercup because if you complain about it you're going to get no hours.

I remember watching a TV show a few years ago about shop workers. One of the young guys worked at Krispy Kreme on a zero hour contract and had just moved into a shared flat with his friend. His manager was a bit of a dick, ruled the shop like their own private fiefdom, and was giving him barely any shifts. On the week his rent was due they'd only given him one shift and when he showed up for it they said they were overstaffed and he wasn't needed. He had no money to pay his rent and had to rely on his flatmate to pick up the tab for that mo the bills and food.

That's the reality of zero hour contracts for many people.

Great if you have a partner who can easily cover bills when you aren’t working. But if you are someone who has 20 hours this week, then get told 4 hours next week, zero hours the next week, and 12 hours the following week- doesn’t pay the rent and bills does it!

If you need a stable income they're no good to you. I would have thought that was pretty obvious.

How do you sort out childcare if you have no money to pay for it and no idea whether you'll need it until the day? What if your shift suddenly changes to a 9pm finish and the childminder only works until 6? How do you get into work on the bus/train if they haven't given you more than 3 hours for the previous 2 weeks?

It can only work if there are fixed hours and salary also coming in that covers ALL the bills + childcare in advance.

I'm surprised you can't work this out yourself. You say you have a zero hours contract, and it's great, but then add that you also have a full time job which is your main source of income.

Well, unfortunately, far too many people are on ZHC, which is their only source of income. Many employers now also don't offer full time jobs, because they just have several staff on ZHC, to cover one person's full time job. It saves them money, and they'll always have someone willing to cover a shift.

Some employers also put it in the contracts that employees are not allowed to have another job, and that they have to be available for all shifts they're offered. If they turn down a shift, they lose their jobs.

How is anybody expected to budget and pay for bills, when they don't even know how much they will earn?

It's disgusting the way workers are being exploited like this.

In some situations they work brilliantly, in others they don't. It's that simple really.

People relying on them as their main source of income in a household is the real problem - and the prevalence of these contracts seems to have set a precedent that it's ok for everyone to just offer them instead of steady hours, so it makes it really hard for some people to find a steady income.

For extra income, they are great. If they are your only income, you are screwed.

I think they are great for those with less financial responsibility. Students, people living with parents, part time topup wage where household income is good otherwise..etc. A few of my friends have had issues where they were unable to take more than one job as have to be available for shift at short notice as part of contract, had some weeks with 50 hours, then a month with none at all, no job security...

I have never been on one, luckily. They would not work for my current setup at all and it does seem a lot of employers take the piss with them. But in theory they are good...for some people. In practise though, I would think steady hours are better for most.

I used to love my zero hours contract. Worked as a carer whilst studying for 5 years. Meant I could pick up hours to suit me and then not work at all during exam weeks etc. Also enabled me to go to visit family in Australia and Singapore for a month at a time each year as didn't have to worry about using annual leave.

No sick pay beyond SSP which is really hard to claim on zero hours.

Holiday pay rolled into wages so no actual time off because you can't afford to take it.

Never knowing what shifts you'll get.

Never being able to plan financially.

Can't get tenancy/mortgage

Can't turn down shifts as you might not get offered another so often end up working crazy long weeks to keep boss happy/get extra money to cover weeks with no shifts.

No investment in job/lack of job satisfaction as you're often just covering for other people and being given very little responsibility over what you do.

Lack of progression.

Not feeling a proper part of the team.

They can be good for some people. They were great as a student but even then, not having security was very hard.

As PP have said, zero hours for extra income is perfect but not main income. It's soul destroying and stressful and that is not good for mental health.

It also lets the govt off the hook on unemployment figures.

They are fine in some circumstances but terrible if it's you only job. Most expect you to be able to work at no notice and be available 24/7 so you have to have childcare options available 24/7 (ie be paying out for a childminder/nursery for all hours where partner/other family/school won't be available - and then you might get nothing.

I don't think they should be banned - there are genuine circumstances where they are appropriate.

However I don't think employers like supermarkets and other employers who need large numbers of low-skilled workers should use them except if the employee requests it. The standard contract should be for 16 hours pw minimum, with employees able to have some level of predictability for when those shifts will be, and then peaks and troughs in demand managed by varying those hours up as needed, taking on additional temps during seasonal demand.

Zero hours contracts are used by lazy employers who don't want to spend time working on a shift plan that actually treats their employees as human beings. It's obviously way easier to just have a list of all the people with zero hours contracts and fill the week's schedule without reference to ensuring each employee gets a reasonable number of hours. It also saves on having a reasonable HR system - sickness & holidays ignored, you just don't get scheduled in. Performance and training issues, don't bother helping the employee to develop, just stop scheduling them any hours. Want to get rid of someone, side step the normal regulations for employment rights, just don't schedule them for any hours.

If I was a single mum for example I'd avoid like the plague, how could you even begin to plan and budget with a wage that fluctuates like that? At least if you are on full benefits you are poor but have a steady predictable income.

If you're married to someone that can cover all the essential living costs, living with parents or its later in your working life and you aren't ready to retire but could manage on less money then they it won't do you any harm.

They are set up as being too favourable for the employer and can screw over the employee.

I’ve only seen a few times where they’ve actually worked well for both parties (like at McDonald’s or a factory when I was a student)

They are only good if you aren’t reliant on them to live. Employers use them to blackmail and punish workers, that is so very wrong.

The percentage of workers on ZHC should be limited by law.