Legality of employer cutting shift hours with no notice

[User33678888]

This is a completely fabricated story which hasn't just happened to my nephew..

He works in a restaurant. Numbers of hours per week vary based on staffing requirements.
The employer often asks if any of their staff wish to leave early or have a day off if they has rota'd too many staff (or offers extra hours)
Recently they have started sending staff home when nobody volunteers for the cuts.
To me this seems horribly unjust and isn't a way I'd treat anybody, but I'm unsure of the exact legality.
Does anyone have any experience of this sort of thing?

[edc]

What are the contracted hours?

[User33678888]

12, but averaged over a 38 week period or some nonsense.

[Pothole]

User33678888 said:

12, but averaged over a 38 week period or some nonsense.

Not nonsense, just standard working time regulations stuff. Usually averaged over a 17 week period for people who work a full week, but the same standard is often used by employers for all employees for expediency.

Is this hypothetical person still being able to work, and getting paid for, their contracted 12 hours? If so, they have no beef. If not, it's time to look for another job. I have no idea about the legalities of what the employer appears to be doing (based on the info provided) but questioning it may push them into just offering zero hours contracts.

[edc]

User33678888 said:

12, but averaged over a 38 week period or some nonsense.

And does this hold up?

Also look up lay-off and short-time working. In certain situations it is permissible to reduce hours.

[User33678888]

He's now doing under 12 this week due to this. It's still over an average of 12 as he has done more than 12 in other weeks in the preceding x weeks.
Whilst I agree and told him he should be looking for a new job, I wondered more about the reasonableness of the employers behaviour.
I think most of us would be miffed to travel for an hour only to be sent home after 1 or 2 hours when expecting to be there for say 8.
I'd hoped there'd be some good practice guidelines or similar..

[edc]

What is their policy or past practice in handling these situations?

[Pothole]

User33678888 said:

He's now doing under 12 this week due to this. It's still over an average of 12 as he has done more than 12 in other weeks in the preceding x weeks.
Whilst I agree and told him he should be looking for a new job, I wondered more about the reasonableness of the employers behaviour.
I think most of us would be miffed to travel for an hour only to be sent home after 1 or 2 hours when expecting to be there for say 8.
I'd hoped there'd be some good practice guidelines or similar..

There's bound to be good practice and guidelines. Neither of those are legal requirements. Welcome to the world. Almost every employer is unreasonable to a greater or lesser degree.

[User33678888]

edc said:

What is their policy or past practice in handling these situations?

Unsure on policy but in the past they'd apparently offer their staff the chance to leave earlier, or have extra days off but if no takers were found then the staff would complete their shifts and be paid for them.
This sending home thing is apparently new.

[Pothole]

User33678888 said:

Unsure on policy but in the past they'd apparently offer their staff the chance to leave earlier, or have extra days off but if no takers were found then the staff would complete their shifts and be paid for them.
This sending home thing is apparently new.

Signs of a sinking ship. Definitely time to move on.

[User33678888]

Pothole said:

Signs of a sinking ship. Definitely time to move on.

Agreed. But can he make them pay for remainder of his cut shift on his way out?