‘End insecure working’ call

The number of people on zero hours contracts – who are not guaranteed set hours of work and have very few rights and protections – has spiked to a record level of 910,000.

But the figures show too that the growth in zero hours contracts (ZHCs) is slowing down – in the second half of 2016, ZHC growth slumped to 0.8 per cent from 7.7 per cent over the same time the year before.

This, the think tank the Resolution Foundation has said, may indicate that workers are turning away from the contracts as they have a greater understanding of how they’re being exploited. It could also indicate that firms are dropping ZHCs in a bid to repair reputational damage.

Both of these possible explanations for the slowdown in growth of ZHCs were largely driven by concerted media campaigns coordinated by trade unions including Unite.

Sports Direct

Unite’s campaign against retail giant Sports Direct’s working practices – widely covered in the media last year – prompted the firm to make a number of changes, including unilaterally ending the use of ZHCs for its shop staff.

In a matter of weeks, many high street businesses followed suit, with pub chain Wetherspoons announcing it would end its use of ZHCs in September last year and Green King announcing the same a week later. And only a day after Green King’s decision, Everyman cinema chain too joined the growing number of big companies deciding to give their workforce a chance at fixed employment each week.

And earlier this year, fast food chain McDonald’s, previously the single employer using the greatest number of zero hours contracts in the UK – with 80,000 of its employees not guaranteed minimum hours of work each week – changed course, offering staff contracts with a minimum  of four hours a week, 16 hours or 30 hours.

“The negative publicity these contracts have attracted may well have played a role in their slowdown, as firms rethink their use,” noted Resolution Foundation policy analysist Conor D’Arcy, commenting today on the slowdown in growth of ZHC use.

“Not providing guaranteed hours of work for those who want it, especially those in low-paying roles, can have a hugely negative impact on the living standards of workers and their families, as budgeting becomes near impossible,” he added.

“The challenge now is to ensure that these still-popular contracts are reserved for cases of genuine desired flexibility for worker and employer.”

But Unite has called for an all-out ban on zero hours contracts which the union believes always put disproportionately greater power in the hands of employers. That’s because if you complain how you’re being treated for any reason whatsoever, bosses can ‘zero’ down your hours at a whim, effectively sacking you without having to say ‘you’re fired.’

‘Let’s learn from New Zealand’

Unite general secretary Len McCluskey today (March 3) reiterated the call to legislate against ZHCs.

“Let’s learn from New Zealand – put workers’ welfare first and outlaw these hire and fire contracts,” he said.

Last year, New Zealand made history when its government unanimously passed legislation to ban ZHCs – lawmakers across the political spectrum there agreed that the contracts were inherently unjust.

And a Unite-commissioned poll last year showed that there would be a similar appetite for banning ZHCs here in the UK.

More than six in 10 UK people (64 per cent) want zero hours contracts banned, according to the poll, with even a majority of Conservatives – 55 per cent – also calling for an end to their use.

The poll also reflected a pervasive sense of despair among both young and working-class people – the very same groups who tend to be on zero-hours contracts.

Among those aged 18-24 years of age, 55 per cent state that they are not confident about the future, while only 24 per cent across all age groups say they are pessimistic of the future.

McCluskey said that the now close to one million people in the UK on zero hours contracts means “One million people with no job security, who are earning less than people in stable work and who, from week to week, do not know what they will have to live on.

“So, while some companies appear to be waking up to the reputational damage attached to this sort of employment, it remains the case that in order to make work pay in this country, insecure working must end,” he said.