Zero hour contracts

[Tangled up in Blue]

This is a great post Lee and illustrates the point that I was trying to make to the lefties that you run the firm with zero hour contracts or the firm doesn't run at all. I would say funny how they chose to ignore it but most of them don't live in the actual world but some fantasy world of how things should be according to the Guardian.

On the contrary my wife (and her brother) have until recently, been running what effectively amounted to a small firm,organising a team of carers to look after their 88 year old mother 24/7, still living at home and suffering from Alhzeimer's.

Ironically, the only two carers who were actually declared-because they wanted to be-have received redundancy payments until two months after my mother-in-law's death, at the end of September.The other carers got nothing, of course.

 

[GrumpyBlue]

crazy as it sounds I would encourage companies to treat their employees with respect and offer them the basic rights that the rest of us 'enjoy'. The notion of it being acceptable for their staff to be treated like **** just to keep the margins high is why additional regulation is deemed necessary. Sad that some companies can't be trusted to operate in a responsible manner.

Well said :thumbsup:

 

[OldBlueLady]

Are you saying that someone already on a fixed term contract can be forced to change to a zero hours?

Nope, pressure comes on those people on JSA in particular, or school leavers, as I believe I mentioned earlier on in this thread.

 

[Ricky Otto]

It is an interesting perspective, but still doesn't get away from the fact that often those who are forced onto zero hours contracts (and yes, they often are FORCED) can be those most in need of having secured pay and hours.

I wonder also how holiday leave works on zero hour contracts? With most part time work you have pro-rata'd holidays, so how does that work if you don't have regular hours?

Surely the answer is flexible hours contracts with a stated minimum subsidised by the government? People are encouraged to take work rather than stay on the dole because of the risk involved with zero hour contracts and welfare monies can be used to support those at the bottom of the food chain who want to work for once rather than punishing them. Probably over simplifying things but surely this is a feasable option.

 

[superblue24]

You seem to be another of those Tory, (or ex-Tory voters in your case), who seem to have conveniently forgotten that there was a global ie worldwide crisis back in 2008.

Shame the Labour government in power at the time failed to notice this fact.....

You seem confident about Milibland being in power next May.....Care to add an extra zero to the bet since you're feeling so bold?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Shame the Labour government in power at the time failed to notice this fact.....

You seem confident about Milibland being in power next May.....Care to add an extra zero to the bet since you're feeling so bold?

Ha! No thanks. I bet for fun-my father was the professional gambler in the family.

In answer to your first point I'm sure you'll remember Brown-inadvertently- claiming to have saved the world.:winking:

He certainly saved a few UK banks.

 

[londonblue]

I am going to pipe up on the zero hour contract. I currently employ around 30 people on zero hour contracts. I run a private domiciliary care firm and the business relies on potential clients ringing and requiring services. ....no clients no income. The business simply could not survive if everyone was guaranteed x amount of hours....nature of my business is clients arent around for ever. This is where recruitment comes in. I do look for those who want a very flexible work option, semi retired people. Just to add I never promise x amount of hours but more often than not I manage to build hours up to desired levels.

I think with everything in life, there is the good examples and the bad examples. From what you've said above, it seems that actually what you're doing is Ok. You're taking people who quite like the idea of only working every now and again, and giving them exactly what they want.

However, there are many cases where zero hours contracts are allowing employers to exploit vulnerable people. It seems you're not one of them. It is also allowing this government to claim to be increasing employment, even if people aren't actually earning.

It is therefore wrong to say that zero hours contracts should be outlawed. It is also wrong to say that, because of the odd example of where it works well, nothing should change.

The question is, how do you outlaw exploitative zero hours contracts without impacting the examples where it does work well? The answer is, I don't have the foggiest, but I do believe it is worth looking into.

 

[Pubey]

I think with everything in life, there is the good examples and the bad examples. From what you've said above, it seems that actually what you're doing is Ok. You're taking people who quite like the idea of only working every now and again, and giving them exactly what they want.

However, there are many cases where zero hours contracts are allowing employers to exploit vulnerable people. It seems you're not one of them. It is also allowing this government to claim to be increasing employment, even if people aren't actually earning.

It is therefore wrong to say that zero hours contracts should be outlawed. It is also wrong to say that, because of the odd example of where it works well, nothing should change.

The question is, how do you outlaw exploitative zero hours contracts without impacting the examples where it does work well? The answer is, I don't have the foggiest, but I do believe it is worth looking into.

Well said, completely agree.

 

[Uncle Leo]

I think with everything in life, there is the good examples and the bad examples. From what you've said above, it seems that actually what you're doing is Ok. You're taking people who quite like the idea of only working every now and again, and giving them exactly what they want.

However, there are many cases where zero hours contracts are allowing employers to exploit vulnerable people. It seems you're not one of them. It is also allowing this government to claim to be increasing employment, even if people aren't actually earning.

It is therefore wrong to say that zero hours contracts should be outlawed. It is also wrong to say that, because of the odd example of where it works well, nothing should change.

The question is, how do you outlaw exploitative zero hours contracts without impacting the examples where it does work well? The answer is, I don't have the foggiest, but I do believe it is worth looking into.

I think we can close this thread now can't we? Spot on.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

This is a great post Lee and illustrates the point that I was trying to make to the lefties that you run the firm with zero hour contracts or the firm doesn't run at all. I would say funny how they chose to ignore it but most of them don't live in the actual world but some fantasy world of how things should be according to the Guardian.

I don't think this is a left or right thing it's a fair or unfair thing. The fact that the larger employers would use it in an unscrupulous manner leads to it being regulated for everyone. The fantasy world would be expecting 17,000 Sports Direct staff to move on to something better just like that.

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

Ha! No thanks. I bet for fun-my father was the professional gambler in the family.

In answer to your first point I'm sure you'll remember Brown-inadvertently- claiming to have saved the world.:winking:

He certainly saved a few UK banks.

Tax payers money saved the banks and if Brown hadn't sold off the gold so cheaply then we would have had more of it.

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

I think with everything in life, there is the good examples and the bad examples. From what you've said above, it seems that actually what you're doing is Ok. You're taking people who quite like the idea of only working every now and again, and giving them exactly what they want.

However, there are many cases where zero hours contracts are allowing employers to exploit vulnerable people. It seems you're not one of them. It is also allowing this government to claim to be increasing employment, even if people aren't actually earning.

It is therefore wrong to say that zero hours contracts should be outlawed. It is also wrong to say that, because of the odd example of where it works well, nothing should change.

The question is, how do you outlaw exploitative zero hours contracts without impacting the examples where it does work well? The answer is, I don't have the foggiest, but I do believe it is worth looking into.

excellent post sir. would green you but seems I need to spread the love first. when on earth did I green you before?!!!

 

[londonblue]

excellent post sir. would green you but seems I need to spread the love first. when on earth did I green you before?!!!

No idea. You're obviously not much of a "fasto slag" though!

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I'm wondering if the Newcastle sponsorship by Wonga is tied in with Sports Direct creating new cashless customers on a promise of 'probably be some more work around next week.....'