0 hr contracts
Discussion
ToothbrushMan said:
I have never heard of arranging your own cover if you need time off. Is this company in the 21st century?
I don't think it's that unusual, is it?My wife has this. Works in a gym as part of a team of 4. They're not on zero hours contracts; they're all on full time working contracts, but they do arrange their own cover between them. It's the sort of environment where they couldn't really bring in temp cover without having to put them through a day or two of training, which isn't really viable, and communicating via the manager would just add delays and complications, so they're all happy to just arrange cover between themselves.
The difference, of course, is that they're a very good employer - reflected in the fact that my wife is the only one in the gym team who has been there under 5 years, which is unheard of in that industry! - so the employees are happy to go with it and make things work.
Just thought I'd update this thread. I had enough of the place, sleeping all day for a shift only to wake up to a message from the manager saying not to come in. So I handed in my notice, told them to jog on. And have just heard tonight from another employee there that they've done the same today. Seen they've not sold as many advanced tickets as they thought, and given 5 employees thr night off as "they're not needed". Boils my piss this does
HedgeyGedgey said:
Just thought I'd update this thread. I had enough of the place, sleeping all day for a shift only to wake up to a message from the manager saying not to come in. So I handed in my notice, told them to jog on. And have just heard tonight from another employee there that they've done the same today. Seen they've not sold as many advanced tickets as they thought, and given 5 employees thr night off as "they're not needed". Boils my piss this does
Good, sounds like you're much better off because of it. There are many employers who do understand the needs of a flexible work pattern and might well be able to suit you better; though of course in a university town there will always be competition for those jobs as well.
Best of luck
HedgeyGedgey said:
Just thought I'd update this thread. I had enough of the place, sleeping all day for a shift only to wake up to a message from the manager saying not to come in. So I handed in my notice, told them to jog on. And have just heard tonight from another employee there that they've done the same today. Seen they've not sold as many advanced tickets as they thought, and given 5 employees thr night off as "they're not needed". Boils my piss this does
Good for you.Zero hours contracts are utterly exploitative.
The Mad Monk said:
Not necessarily.
Vaud said:
In some cases yes. In some cases no. They are not a unilaterally bad thing.
I concede that in very limited circumstances they are not. However, they are mostly utilised by shady employers to pass risk from employer to employee. Stories like OPs, or someone I know who will get told a few hours before his shift starts that he isn't to come in because they don't have enough bookings in the restaurant, or even for more inane reasons like the owner is going to close the restaurant for the evening as they are going to pick up their new dog. Integroo said:
I concede that in very limited circumstances they are not. However, they are mostly utilised by shady employers to pass risk from employer to employee. Stories like OPs, or someone I know who will get told a few hours before his shift starts that he isn't to come in because they don't have enough bookings in the restaurant, or even for more inane reasons like the owner is going to close the restaurant for the evening as they are going to pick up their new dog.
The stats disagree with youhttps://www.cipd.co.uk/about/media/press/041215-ze... - ok, 2015 but a reputable and independent group
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25098984
https://iea.org.uk/media/two-thirds-of-people-on-z...
I'd agree with you that there are some exploitative employers, most probably smaller businesses who don't understand their responsibilities.
I'm in favour of better protection against the abuse, rather than scrapping ZHCs. For some demographics, e.g. students they are very, very popular as they also allow a balance and flex in term/non-term time.
McDonalds, by example, probably have it right by offerings some minimum thresholds - 4/8/16 hours, etc with flex on top.
Integroo said:
The Mad Monk said:
Not necessarily.
Vaud said:
In some cases yes. In some cases no. They are not a unilaterally bad thing.
I concede that in very limited circumstances they are not. However, they are mostly utilised by shady employers to pass risk from employer to employee. Stories like OPs, or someone I know who will get told a few hours before his shift starts that he isn't to come in because they don't have enough bookings in the restaurant, or even for more inane reasons like the owner is going to close the restaurant for the evening as they are going to pick up their new dog. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25098984
Unfortunately you've fallen I to the trap of believing politicians hot air. Do you know anyone treated badly as an FTE? If so does that make FTE bad?
Of course there are exploitative and crap employers, but that's not exclusive to ZHC. For many it works well.
Edited by 98elise on Friday 22 February 13:15
HedgeyGedgey said:
andburg said:
you have no contracted hours, you're not asking for leave, you're telling them you are unavailable for work that week.
I expect the terms/contract you have is a standard hours contract for notice periods that's just had the number of hours set at 0 rather than a specifically written contract.
Thank you, I don't believe I'm entitled to holiday pay as such because i dont work enoughI expect the terms/contract you have is a standard hours contract for notice periods that's just had the number of hours set at 0 rather than a specifically written contract.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff