Contracts often unfairly demonised, finds CIPD report
Zero hours workers are more likely to be satisfied with their work-life balance than other employees, new CIPD research has revealed.
The use of zero hours contracts in the UK economy has been “underestimated, oversimplified and unfairly demonised”, argues the institute’s latest report, ‘Zero-hours contracts: myth and reality’.
A CIPD survey of more than 2,500 workers found that those on zero hours contracts were just as satisfied with their job as the average UK employee (60 per cent and 59 per cent respectively), and more likely to be happy with their work-life balance than other workers (65 per cent versus 58 per cent).
The most common reason for zero hours workers to prefer such a contract was that flexible working suited their current circumstances, the study showed. And while 38 per cent of workers with this type of arrangement would like to be given more hours, 52 per cent were content with their allotted shifts.
The latest research also incorporated a fresh survey of 1,000 employers, which confirmed the CIPD’s initial estimate that there are approximately one million people – or 3.1 per cent of the UK workforce – employed on zero hours contracts.
Two-thirds of employers highlighted their need to respond to peaks and troughs in demand as the prime reason for using these contracts, and around half said that a staff preference for flexibility had also informed their approach.
But the CIPD’s study also highlighted poor practice found among some employers.
One in five zero hours workers reported that they were sometimes (17 per cent) or always (3 per cent) penalised if they were not available for work, while four in ten said that they did not receive any notice about their next shift.
The CIPD recommended that employers regularly reviewed whether zero hours contracts were appropriate for the nature of work involved and that there was a clear business reason for using them. The report called on organisations not to restrict zero hours staff from working for another employer when they had no shifts available, and to ensure pay parity with permanent employees doing the same job.
Alongside the research, the CIPD has also produced guidance in collaboration with law firm Lewis Silkin to help tackle issues around poor practice, including the low level of understanding about employment rights among many employers and zero hours workers.
Peter Cheese, chief executive of the CIPD, said: “Our research shows that the majority of people employed on these contracts are satisfied with their jobs. However, we also recognise that there is a need to improve poor practice in the use of zero hours contracts, for example the lack of notice many zero hours staff receive when work is cancelled. If this is unavoidable then employers should at least provide some level of compensation.”
Cheese added that there should be an emphasis on improving management practice and enforcing existing regulation first, rather than bringing in new legislation which would be “extremely hard to do without unintended consequences”.
“Employers that took part in the research told us that if restrictions were placed on employers’ use of zero-hours contracts, they would simply switch to another form of casual labour,” he explained. “Such an approach would also penalise the majority of zero hours workers that choose these types of working arrangements because they suit their particular circumstances.”