August 2013

Zero Hours

 An employment tribunal claim has been brought on behalf of Ms Gabriel-Abraham, against her employer SportsDirect.com over its use of zero-hours contracts. Ms Gabriel-Abraham claims that zero hours contracts discriminate against part time workers.

 While meeting the terms of the Employment Rights Act 1996 by providing a written statement of the terms and conditions of employment, a zero hours contract contains provisions which create an "on call" arrangement between the employer and the employee.

 The employee agrees to be available for work as and when required, so that no particular number of hours or times of work are specified. The employee is expected to be on call and receives payment only for those hours worked.

 The contract does not oblige the employer to provide work for the employee or guarantee to provide them with any work at all. This provides flexibility to employers whereby they do not necessarily have to pay their staff during quiet periods whilst keeping them available on short notice for when they are needed.

 Whilst these arrangements may be ideal for some people such as students or retirees who want occasional earnings, seasonal work or are able to be flexible about when they work, others have the risk of unpredictable hours and earnings with have no guaranteed shifts or income.

 The use of zero hours contracts has increased considerably since the recession of 2008 particularly in low-paid sectors creating insecurity to the worker who will have no holiday, sick or redundancy pay benefit or income guaranteed.

 Recent press coverage has now revealed the extent of the numbers of staff engaged under zero-hours contracts, not only Sports Direct but at other big names including Abercrombie & Fitch, Amazon, Boots, Cineworld, McDonalds, the Tate Galleries and even Buckingham Palace.

The potential abuse by management as a tool to reward or reprimand employees for any reason or no real reason raises issues about how workers rights can be protected. This has led to a government review of the breadth and impact of zero-hours contracts with politicians calling for chains to offer at least minimum guaranteed hours. Business Secretary, Vince Cable, has suggested that zero-hours contracts may be subject to legislation but ruled out a complete ban and considered looking at changing the rules for workers allowed only to work for a single employer. He will decide in September whether to hold a formal consultation on specific proposals to ensure that zero-hours contracts are used correctly.

 End

 Comment from Helena Woodward-Vukcevic, who specialises in general commercial litigation and employment law at law firm Hart Brown,http://www.hartbrown.co.uk

 About Hart Brown

 Hart Brown, a leading law firm with offices throughout Surrey and in London, has been offering a full range of legal and financial investment services to businesses and individuals for the past 90 years. With 15 partners, more than 110 staff, six offices and a reputation for delivering high quality service, Hart Brown is committed to building long-term relationships with its clients.

 In particular, the firm puts a great emphasis on regular communication with clients, as well as the need for efficiency and value for money in order to deliver a high-quality service. Hart Brown currently operates from offices located in Cobham, Cranleigh, Godalming, Guildford, Wimbledon Village and Woking. For more information please visit www.hartbrown.co.uk