You still have your rights: Tackling the myth that Zero-hours contracts alleviate workers of many of their statutory rights!!

You still have your rights: Tackling the myth that Zero-hours contracts alleviate workers of many of their statutory rights!!

A popular topic, which has gained a great deal of notoriety in the press recently, is the use of “Zero Hours Contracts”. The chartered institute of personnel and development (CIPD) estimates that there are nearly 1 million people employed under said “Zero Hours Contracts”. Major companies have come under fire for using them, Trade Unions are calling them unethical and accusations that unscrupulous employers are using them to exploit workers have been voiced. The issue has gained soo much attention that the business secretary Vince Cable has ordered a review of the use of such contracts.

Distressingly, the popular opinion being presented in the mainstream media, is that zero hours contracts relieve workers of many of the fundamental rights they can expect as an employee. This prevailing belief perceived by so many, is one which we would argue is untrue. Firstly, in many articles and news stories there are regular references to pseudo legal terms such as “casual” or “temporary” workers, which have no standing in law. In UK law one’s employment status is defined as being either an “employee, a “worker” or self-employed / contractor; with “casual” or “temporary” worker having no clear definition in statute. The main definitions for each employment status can be found athttps://www.gov.uk/employment-status/overview. The main tests, which would be conducted by a tribunal, to decipher which category an employee falls into would include, whether or not said individual (sourcehttps://www.gov.uk/employment-status/worker):

1. has a contract or other arrangement to do work or services personally for a reward (the contract doesn’t have to be written)

2. their reward is for money or a benefit in kind, eg the promise of a contract or future work

3. only have a limited right to send someone else to do the work (‘subcontract’)

4. have to turn up for work even if they don’t want to

5. their employer has to have work for them to do as long as the contract or arrangement lasts

6. aren’t doing the work as part of their own limited company in an arrangement where the ‘employer’ is actually a customer or client .

7. Are being paid through the company payroll and are not responsible for processing and managing their own tax returns.

So long as most of these test, especially number 7, holds true then an individual would be at the very least classed as a “worker” in the eyes of the law. As such, said worker is entitled to certain employment rights, including (sourcehttps://www.gov.uk/employment-status/worker):

1. getting the National Minimum Wage

2. protection against unlawful deductions from wages

3. the statutory minimum level of paid holiday

4. the statutory minimum length of rest breaks

5. not to work more than 48 hours on average per week or to opt out of this right if they choose

6. protection against unlawful discrimination

7. protection for ‘whistleblowing’ (reporting wrongdoing in the workplace)

8. not to be treated less favourably if they work part-time

They may also be entitled to:

• Statutory Maternity Pay

• Ordinary Statutory Paternity Pay

• Statutory Sick Pay

A major issue with “zero-hours” contracts is the fact that many are not guaranteed a specific number of hours on week by week or even a day by day basis. It is for this reason, possibly, that people believe they are not entitled to things such as holiday pay or sick pay. Many on such contracts however, work as if they are full employees with regular hours on a week by week basis and such people, we believe, are entitled to claim such benefits based on an average time worked over a prolonged period of time, for example 3 months or more.

Expanding on this concept, we would argue that one’s contractual agreement with an employer, whether full time, part time or a “zero-hours” contract, is in fact circumstantial. A person’s contract and terms of employment, it could be argued, is defined by the work they regularly undertake within any given job role. As such if what they do as part of their job role differs to what is written in their contract, then said written contract is superseded by the new terms as defined by the work actually undertaken within the specific job role. Therefore, if said employee works an average of 30 hours a week continuously over 3 months or more then it would be hard for the employer to argue that said employee is on a true zero-hours contract and that employee would be entitled to all rights as a worker based on the average work undertaken per week over the length of their employment. After 2 years of continuous and regular service, a worker is classed as a permanent employee and is entitled to all rights which are granted to an “employee” in UK law; which would grant them the right to take a case for unfair or constructive dismissal to a tribunal should such a case arise.

In conclusion, we argue that “zero-hours” contracts are not a, proverbial, “get out of jail free” card that allows employers to exploit workers. In fact based on a workers circumstance and their working paradigm, they are entitled to all rights granted to them as a worker in UK law. As such, while many of the issues raised hear have not yet been fully tested in a court of law, we believe that employers should still act in accordance with said law and employees should not be afraid to ask for their rights and hold the employer to account if need be.