Many told shifts cancelled just hours before starting work – but CIPD says survey shows the contracts are unfairly demonised
Job seekers queue outside a Jobcentre Plus
branch in London Photograph: Oli Scarff/Getty Images
Almost half of zero-hour contract workers have had their shifts cancelled
without any notice, according to the first in-depth study of the way more than 1
million people on the controversial contracts are treated.
Two out of five workers on the contracts said they had been informed only hours before starting work that a shift had been cancelled. A further 6% had been told as their shift was about to begin.
The study also found that 20% are sometimes or always docked wages or penalised in some way if they are not available for work. But the survey of 1,000 zero-hour workers by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) found they were happier with their work-life balance than the average worker and equally satisfied with their job. Almost half of zero-hour workers were satisfied with their job against 27% who were dissatisfied.
A CIPD spokesman said the findings showed calls for restrictions on the contracts' use were misplaced and firms using them had been "unfairly demonised".
But the CIPD admitted that employers exploited the contracts to cancel shifts
with little or no notice and penalised staff who were unable to attend a
shift.
"However, we also recognise that there is a need to improve poor practice in the use of zero-hours contracts, for example the lack of notice many zero-hours staff receive when work is cancelled.
"If this is unavoidable then employers should at least provide some level of compensation. In addition, it seems that many employers and zero-hours staff are unaware of the employment rights people on these types of working arrangements may be entitled to."
In the summer the institute said the initial findings of its employment survey found that 1 million workers were employed on the contracts, at the time quadrupling the official figure.
The contracts, which allow an employer to hire staff without an obligation to provide any minimum working hours, are used widely in the care industry, hotel and leisure sector and by many retailers. In the last two years public sector organisations have transferred staff to zero-hour rotas.
Labour said the findings showed there was still widespread abuse of the contracts and the government needed to act.
Ian Murray, shadow minister for trade and investment, said Labour would ban employers from insisting workers be available when there is no guarantee of work. It would also let workers work for more than one firm without being penalised and force firms to give a minimum hours contract to longstanding zero-hours workers. "While the government has failed to act, Labour would outlaw the exploitative use of zero-hours contracts," he said.
Ian Brinkley, policy director at the Work Foundation, an employment thinktank, said the report showed there was a large minority of affected workers citing significant problems around pay, hours and the fear of being penalised.
Guardian
Two out of five workers on the contracts said they had been informed only hours before starting work that a shift had been cancelled. A further 6% had been told as their shift was about to begin.
The study also found that 20% are sometimes or always docked wages or penalised in some way if they are not available for work. But the survey of 1,000 zero-hour workers by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) found they were happier with their work-life balance than the average worker and equally satisfied with their job. Almost half of zero-hour workers were satisfied with their job against 27% who were dissatisfied.
A CIPD spokesman said the findings showed calls for restrictions on the contracts' use were misplaced and firms using them had been "unfairly demonised".
"The use of zero-hours
contracts in the UK economy has been underestimated, oversimplified and, in
some cases, unfairly demonised," he said. "Our research shows the majority of
people employed on these contracts are satisfied with their jobs."
"However, we also recognise that there is a need to improve poor practice in the use of zero-hours contracts, for example the lack of notice many zero-hours staff receive when work is cancelled.
"If this is unavoidable then employers should at least provide some level of compensation. In addition, it seems that many employers and zero-hours staff are unaware of the employment rights people on these types of working arrangements may be entitled to."
In the summer the institute said the initial findings of its employment survey found that 1 million workers were employed on the contracts, at the time quadrupling the official figure.
The contracts, which allow an employer to hire staff without an obligation to provide any minimum working hours, are used widely in the care industry, hotel and leisure sector and by many retailers. In the last two years public sector organisations have transferred staff to zero-hour rotas.
Labour said the findings showed there was still widespread abuse of the contracts and the government needed to act.
Ian Murray, shadow minister for trade and investment, said Labour would ban employers from insisting workers be available when there is no guarantee of work. It would also let workers work for more than one firm without being penalised and force firms to give a minimum hours contract to longstanding zero-hours workers. "While the government has failed to act, Labour would outlaw the exploitative use of zero-hours contracts," he said.
Ian Brinkley, policy director at the Work Foundation, an employment thinktank, said the report showed there was a large minority of affected workers citing significant problems around pay, hours and the fear of being penalised.
Guardian
