header-logo header-logo

05 September 2013 / Sarah Johnson
Issue: 7574 / Categories: Opinion , Employment
printer mail-detail

Zero tolerance

nlj_7574_06_0

Should we call time on zero hours contracts, asks Sarah Johnson

Zero hours contracts hit the headlines recently with calls for a ban from some unions. Why all the fuss?

Increasing numbers is one reason. Around one million people in the UK (3–4% of the labour force) now work on zero hours contracts, according to research by the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development (CIPD); about four times more than recent figures from the Office for National Statistics suggested. Although increasingly common, there is some uncertainty about what they are.

What is a zero hours contract?

Zero hours contracts have no strict legal definition. Those working under them may be employees, workers or self-employed. Legal status depends on how the relationship works. Key features are that the individual can be called upon as required, with no set hours, being paid only for work done.

Employment status requires mutuality of obligation (the employer’s obligation to offer work and the employee’s to accept it). Contract wording is not conclusive; tribunals scrutinise how things work in practice if

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Seddons GSC—Ben Marks

Seddons GSC—Ben Marks

Partner joins residential real estate team

Winckworth Sherwood—Shazia Bashir

Winckworth Sherwood—Shazia Bashir

Social housing team announces partner appointment

University of Manchester: The LLM driving tech-focused career growth

University of Manchester: The LLM driving tech-focused career growth

Manchester’s online LLM has accelerated career progression for its graduates

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll