Group B Fourth Subject

This week's topic is "Zero hours" contracts. I want to know what you think to them in theory and practice and whether they exist/could exist in your country, etc...

For those of you who don't know what they are here are a few recent articles:

What they are

ONS report

guardian article

To sum up the last results of ONS : In january 2015, 1.4 millions of theses contracts paid working hours. It's not the case of the 1.3 millions contracts Zero Hours remaining. So 51.85% of contracts effective by taking as reference that a contract has to generate some work and to pay it for something.

In theory, this contract aim to decrease the long-term unemployment and give a flexibility to the labor market. From a statistic point of view, the dynamism of the labor market is there !

In practice, it's a statistical illusion because an employee can be hired by a company, only it exist a gouvernmental bonus to hire a longt-term unemployee ( 1500£). With this contract if the employee don't work, he has no income. Worse, there a competition clause with this contracts. You can be blocked without income and no counted in number of unemployed.
It makes the statistics swell against the unemployment but just hide the precariousness ! Because you can just survive and not bet on the future, with variable incomes and variable planning.

In france is impossible because the people are too warlike & not rather docile. Children...

I did not know this type of contract. But at the first reading is quite surprising... Apparently this is a common thing in England, even Buckingham Palace used it!

There are pros and cons. They can be beneficial in some sectors such as catering, but not appropriate for others. What is worrying is that sometimes they are not cumulative.

I think it’s not suitable in the case of a family where one parent works because it’s too variable. Especially because, according to statistics, since 2011 the number of hours worked per week declined and the pay is lower on average for this type of contract than for a conventional contract.
In contrast it can be a good thing for young people and students looking for summer work or occasionally work.

Regarding the long-term unemployed, that is a good thing because even if they receive low pay they receive additional income to match the amount of unemployment allowance. So they don’t lose money, and feel integrated in society.
However, they must be careful when negotiating the contract not to be harmed. But when we are long-term unemployed are-we really in a strong position to negotiate? Not sure...

In my opinion, Zero-hours contracts ,or more exactly for me the term appropriate « casual contracts » is a phenomenal idea to concept ultra-liberalisme for countries such as england or USA, indeed, give possibility to employers manage theirs staffs ,depending upon the fluctuation of market of work and limited rights of employees ,but avoid paying fixed overheads and giving a flexibility of job. over their workforce for all reason in theory is a great innovation contract but in practice with the crisis , with rising to Hire employee in contract zero rather in full contract However only 38% of workers being employed full-time, working 30 hours or more a week , these workers being exploited ,and theirs situations don't offer enough financial stability and security , often these workers are without Sick pay.
casual contracts could give possibilities to adapt for flexibility work market in difficulties economies such as Spain and Greece,with potential costs too fixed and too expensive for the employers of these countries .
there are other means of adapt to fluctuation , in particular thanks to temporary employment agencies , even if theses cost must expensive, moreover in France , where the social is very importante these type of contract haven’t luck to exist..

Before my reading of documents I know nothing about "Zero-Hours contracts", so I think this specific contract doesn't exist in my fabulous country

I believe it's not a long term solution... People can't live with this kind of contract. How have a family life ? How buy a house, have children ect ? As say the document in the guardian a majority of this contract is for a short period less than 12 months.

To sum up, this contracts could not exist in France because it's more profitable to don't work... We have the luck to be in "socialist" country.

Hello everyone,
Thank you, John, for raising this topic, I see that many students (and me too) didn't know anything about this typer of contract. Surprisingly, this is a quite popular type of contracts in the UK and in USA.
As far as I can judge, this type of contract is rather beneficial for employers, and more rarely for employees. I agree with Amandine that for some types of employees it may be good, but for some employees it may not be acceptable. Zero-contracts may be good for us, students, but for long-time employees this contract is not really useful. Even though zero-contracts employees have the same rights (such as annual leave), zero-contracts employees feel unprotected. In Guardian there was an article where it was precised that zero-contracts workers feel stressed and uncertain about their future. At the same time, this contract is not well regulated : many zero-contract employees complain that, although they have no guaranteed hours, the employer tells them that if they are unable to work a particular shift they won’t be offered any more work.
In conclusion, I would like to say that for us, students, this type of contract is better than no contract at all, but for adults (especially for those who have children) this contract gives not flexibility but uncertainty.

For me, this type of contract seems a good solution for the labor-market in order to match the demand and the offer. I think, one of the problems is the lack of flexibility and this contract can be a really good option. Some people don’t want to work at full-time and can’t find part-time job. It could satisfy this part of the population. Then, when people complain about the lack of financial stability, I think, they should be more involved and find a full-time job if they are looking for financial stability.

Like most of you I never heard about zero hours contract before, so I'm just gonna share my impression on what I've read. This type of contracts seems to be kind of pervert for the workers. Sure, it allows to create jobs, but what kind of jobs ? Precarious ones ? The fact that the employees can be asked to work at any time without any idea of how long it will last is silly. Like some of you mentioned I think the employees are clearly exposed. Whereas, for the employers and its company this measure is gold. It allows great flexibility. So it's seems like these zero hours contracts are only good for one side... Unless, like Tom said, if it's just a short term solution.

I disagree with Quentin , in my mind these kind of contract are profitable for both side
Indeed it will improve flexibility , employers can hire and decide the number of work hours so as to match production with current demand and avoid useless expences
As for employees even if it's short term contract , they will have much more opportunities to have a job due to the fact it's not risky for employers . What's more it could be easier for people without degree to get a job instead of suffering from unemployement . Actually is quite similar to the "interim" in France without charges for employers ...

Zero hours contracts are very common in UK, used by major companies like fast food chain such as McDo ( 90% of McDo's employees in UK work with these kind of contracts ).
I think these kind of contracts are good for employers. It allows to adjust the need of workforce, to match demand and supply in order to reduce labor cost. These kind of contract are useful for companies in these uncertain economic times. Moreover the companies can obtain a 1500£'s government bonus if the company hire a long term jobless person.
But this contract aren't good for employees. There isn't a minimum wage in the zero hours contract. Furthermore theses contracts does not ensure a stable employment ( which is very important in a long term vision for getting a loan in order to buy a house or a car for example ).
To summarize, these contract are suitable for employers, can be a short-term solution but for a long-term vision zero hours contracts aren't suitable for employers. In France it's nearly impossible to see a similar kind of contracts ( even if the temporary work and zero hours contracts share common points ) because like Tom said it's preferable in France to don't work than having a not well paid job and the role of trade unions who refuse all kinds of labor market reform.

In countries where there are no regulations about labor contracts, i thnk it really normal to find what we call "zero hours contract." As a matter of fact, in Africa and Asia, there are not really regulations about working hours, and that's why when we see people working in this way, is just a common situation ,and the matter way for workers is just to get they money after finished to work.
So, what about a country like the US? I think it is a shame for the administration because it shows an inability to be able to resolve economic problem and specially about unemployment . I find this type of contract inappropiate without any kind pretexts concerning flexibility contracts.

For me, zero-hours contracts was a reading comprehension in my last year's English final exam, so I know a little bit about it. In my country, as far as I know this type of contracts doesn't exist yet.
Zero-hours contracts could provide a flexible workforce for employers to solve a temporary need for staff, it let also employees choose the number of hours they want to work per week with basic social security benefits. So it could be a good choice for students without experiences to learn skills or people who don't want a fixed-term contracts. From this perspective zero-hours contracts could balance in short term offer and demand in labor market.
As Veranika mentioned I her text, zero-hour contracts employee feel unprotected. From the definition of zero-hour contracts, there is no obligation for employers to offer work, or for workers to accept it. Thus, zero-hours contracts employees may need to sign several zero-hour contracts to guarantee a monthly minimum wage. The pressure of employee is then understandable.
To sum up, zero-hour contracts is a flexible working agreement between with social society while it mismatch some employees' expectation to a stable income. As a type of contracts wildly used after the global financial crisis in UK and New Zealand, it's pros and cons.

in my point of view, zero-hours contracts would provide a flexible workforce for employers. but i think that Zero-hours contracts support to help young people more easily to find a job but not help emplyers cut their workforce cost. I agree with Veranika that the employees are not as much beneficial as employers, and it's maybe truth that's indeed helpful to young people, especially in the context that europe are been trough economic crisis with high level unemployment rate. Even more, like Veranika said zero-hours contract will increace pressure and anxiety of employee, because for fathers and mothers, they have children to feed or house loan to pay.
the gouvement should not tolerant of the abuse of zero-hours contract. However, the things that suprised me is even gouvement also use zero-contract.
in conlusion, i think the gouvement should improve the regulation of the zero-hours contract.

Interesting, in theory zero hour contracts provides both parties, employers & workers , with a good flexibility. In practice, workers who signs these type of contracts are pretty much aware of what they're getting into .
Workers  pay depends on how often they work , and they have no guarantee of a set number of hours , this seems unfair to me but appparently two in three people on zero-hour contracts doesn't want to work more hours (Survey)
From employers point of view , these bring an impressive workforce flexibility, for example companies can use them to cover temporary staff shortages .

I had never heard of this kind of contract, but in view of what I have just discovered, it seems to me it is not equal between the employers and employee.

Very few workers would like be under this type of contract which does not offer stable Timetables and stable earnings. The contract nonetheless allows working temporarily the time to find a better offer. A short-term contract that offers the UK to bring down the unemployment rate.

The contract enables the labor market to respond more quickly to requests for jobs. However, I do not see the benefits of working under this contract.

NEAU Alexandre wrote:I had never heard of this kind of contract, but in view of what I have just discovered, it seems to me it is not equal between the employers and employee.

Very few workers would like be under this type of contract which does not offer stable Timetables and stable earnings. The contract nonetheless allows working temporarily the time to find a better offer. A short-term contract that offers the UK to bring down the unemployment rate.

The contract enables the labor market to respond more quickly to requests for jobs. However, I do not see the benefits of working under this contract.

Maybe it's just better than not working at all. Getting a foot back inside the job market, getting a first experience, trying something new...

Our benefits system is wonderful but it can be counterproductive to job finding and production.

From an economical point of view, I think that this kind of contract is suitable. Indeed, it permits to adjust the demand to the supply of work. When the demand decreases, you still have the same number of employees but with fewer hours. During the crisis, that is what Germany did while in France we encouraged people to work more and we can see the results now...

From employers’ side, it’s all good ! Indeed, they can adjust their workforce in every period. It permits them to don’t pay people doing nothing. Furthermore, when their employees are sick or are in holidays, they don’t pay them neither. In fact, these contracts give them the entire control !

From employees’ point of view, it depends of the situation. For student or for people who don’t have diploma, it permits them to have a first experience, to start in the labour market and search another job. It’s better than doing nothing... But it’s just for people starting a life. But if they want stability, they have to search or negotiate other contract. Because with Zero hours contracts, you can’t construct a life (can’t have some credit).

It's undeniable that zero hour contracts, like every new idea/reform, divides. It's even made to divide I would say : a false good idea like every governments knows how to do (go ask germans what they think about their 1€/hour job contracts).
I agree with the majority of the comments. Sure it allows to reduce the unemployment in appearance but by encouraging uncertainty & precarity. That's why it's rather appliable to some sectors mentionned above, not to the whole professional world. For a better effectiveness the government should also strengthen the employees' protection as it's been already mentionned : it's apparently all a question of flexibility, but the threat in the employers' eyes is to mistake flexibility with constraint.
On the other hand I am supporting it if it's a short term solution, for example for students or other specific status, like some of you said, but I don't see the perks on the long run.
Whatever, England is an overliberal country compared to France, therefore we have low chances to see this kind of contracts apply down here, unions won't allow it. "Interim" already exists, and it's certainly not seen as a type of contract promoting stability and flexibility.

I agree that the Unions in France wouldn't allow it but it has always amazed me how a country with such a terrible record in trade union membership have such power. Here's a relatively old graph showing that only 8% of the workforce in France are union members much lower than most other European countries. I should probably find a more recent graph but haven't the time or energy:

http://www.globalsherpa.org/powerful-unions-europe