Search results

trouble is i havent seen a problem where minimum or fixed hours would be a solution. the problems are not from zero hours they are from employers taking the piss and taking advantage of those with few options or not inclined to complain. the state has not subsidised wages but suppressed wage...

but we didnt get zero hours "now" nor as a result of Thatcher. NHS and Department of Education have been using them forever, as banked staff or supply teachers. nothing really changed recently except the unions made it a cause du jour a few years ago. trades have always been on and off...

suggest you change the title and first post then, to "short notice periods" and edit the 2-3 days laid off part as you seem to have reversed ferret.

the misunderstanding is not yours. there are people around that seem to think that jobs exist to fullfill a need to employ people and that the only model of employment is 5 days a week ~9-5ish. preferably with overtime available whenever they need it, but never at the behest of the employer.

full time is defined as 30 hours or more, so isnt zero hours. and you cannot just say dont come in tomorrow, you need to give notice probably a week to a month.

funny thing is our OP would have certainly employed people not just zero hours but without any contract, cash in hand in the pub trade, i bet he didn't have staffing for Saturday evening on wages all week long.

you understand that the employment is handled by each individual franchise right? asking people to do 5am starts one week and late shift the next sounds a lot like a shift pattern, which is not something unique to zero hour jobs. the point is problems lie with employers using dodgy practice...

i beleive you should look into what constitutes "zero hours contracts" before writing them off. for example, self employed all come under that category, freelancers, casual work, bank/pool staff, agency staff so on. including casual bar staff. having flexibility, variable of working hours is...