header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
05 September 2013 / Sarah Johnson
Issue: 7574 / Categories: Opinion , Employment
printer mail-detail

Zero tolerance

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll