beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,331
as they account for less than 3% of people employed, they are not being used as a standard contract very often at all.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Zero-hours contracts have been banned in New Zealand
- Thread starter Herr Tubthumper
- Start date
as they account for less than 3% of people employed, they are not being used as a standard contract very often at all.
There are some on the seafront that don't, for example.
GT49er
Well-known member
You are reporting your experience with a zero hours contract. Just one individual example. You experience doesn't mean they're all bad - as others have reported on here (citing their own single examples), sometimes they can work out very well for the employee.
It's the abuse of zero hours contracts that's the problem.
Two of my sons, my mother and mother in law all have zero hour contracts, all different employers and none of them have had their rights abused, sorry I can't supply any horror stories to support the OP's opion[emoji3]
Most small enterprises are able to be competitive in their fields with these contracts, ban them will harm the business which in turn reduces the number jobs, shit aground I say.
Ridiculous argument. How do cafes stay in business in Calais then, or anywhere else in northern Europe? I'd rather have fewer cafes in business if it means the ones that are in business are employing staff on proper contracts.
I think there is room for zero hour contracts, but IMO they should only be applicable to people under 18 and in full time education. These people need the flexibility as much as the businesses.
And in your example, the solution is that a cafe would staff themselves with people on proper contracts, but top up with seasonal people pursuing an education.
I could hazard a guess
Meanwhile, back in the real world.
- Thread starter
- #50
I meant within companies. As I understand it whole sections of workforce at some companies are given these deals.
Feeble.
But I'll humour you: back in the real world we've got people who are slaves to piss-taking bullying businesses.
I'm not quite sure which part of my suggestion is cloud cuckoo land according to you. Certainly, when I was 15-18 years old, I did a lot of casual and seasonal work. But for people who need the money to put a roof over their heads, zero hour contracts are a BAD idea.
- Thread starter
- #52
Are they primarily sit down restaurants though? Or take-away places which as a bonus happen to have a few patio tables and chairs out front?
- Thread starter
- #53
Like New Zealand for instance?
Biscuit Barrel
Well-known member
I can remember reading an article prior to the last election about zero hour contracts. It stated that around 70% of people surveyed (people who were on zero hours contract) actually liked their working hours and conditions. My company employees some members of staff on these contracts, but it is the staff who dictate the working hours, not the company. It is normally colleagues who have retired or semi retired, that work on zero hours contracts at my firm. We are keen for them to remain full time but they don't want too.
Do you really want to ban these contracts when the majority of the people on them are happy? Also, if the contract are banned, this does not mean that all of the staff will be placed onto full time contracts. Many will be let go.
- Thread starter
- #55
I find this figure of 70% very hard to believe. Do you have a source?
You are obviously finding it hard to be objective about the discussion because of some chip you have on your shoulder about employers and business owners.
Just in case you're getting the wrong end of the stick I do not run a business with employees on zero hour contracts. I'm just trying to consider both sides of the argument. I understand that some piss-taking bullying businesses may exploit zero hour contracts, obviously I agree this should be stopped. However there is a place for them in some businesses where having everyone on normal contracts just does not work.
No, you've quite clearly got that wrong as I don't have any chip on my shoulder.
What actually happened is that I, too, saw both sides of the argument, pointing out that zero hour contracts might work for both sides where the employees in question were people in full time education and under the age of 18 - to which you glibly replied "meanwhile back in the real world", an utterly feeble retort that represented a complete absence of sensible argument.
Your words here are a bit hollow: " I understand that some piss-taking bullying businesses may exploit zero hour contracts, obviously I agree this should be stopped." Why don't you tell us HOW this should be stopped? My solution was to only allow zero hour contracts for a sector of the population I'd deem less vulnerable than most, and arguably most suited to zero hour contracts. What is your solution?
Meanwhile, plenty of developed countries continue to ensure their employment law doesn't allow for this kind of thing - New Zealand in this example. It's not hard to see why.
Zero hour 'contracts' would work brilliantly in places where there's a universal basic income. In fact, it's exactly the scenario where UBI works well. I'm not convinced they're a great idea now although, as others say, that could be the way they're implemented over here
sir albion
New member
Well done New Zealand....The only people that benefit are the large corporations and the employers.
It may suit very few who have loads of money and like an easy life,but very very few.
It may suit very few who have loads of money and like an easy life,but very very few.
