Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

The hours wouldn't tell you much. An individual may have a number of reasons for their hours. They may be the second earner in the family and just want a part time job. They may have health problems and not be able to work longer. Shop keepers are waking up to the use of part time workers for the busy times. With online shopping, many retailers cannot afford full time employees. Recessions are always used to cut costs and change the business models.

jezzus, you would argue for the sake of it.

the peeps are not earning enough money to support themselves, for whatever reason.

that's why the social bill keeps getting higher.


What don't you understand about 2 + 2 = 5?

People are not magically going to earn more money whoever is in power. We have been through a recession and living standards are bound to fall. If you want to see people who cannot support themselves then go to Greece, Spain or a number of countries that are much worse than the UK. Like it or not people are going to have to be patient and wait for the economy to improve. The figures suggest that living standards will improve towards the end of next year.

I certainly would not trust Labour in this situation. You may remember that Ed Balls said at the start of the coalition that there would be an increase of millions in the unemployment figures plus various predictions of doom and gloom and that there might be a double dip recession. Of course, he was wrong as usual in every part.

Hey Hays you keep on kidding like your boss Fat Dave and we'l believe you.........NOT.

Balls was right, part time zero hours are masking the true extent of unemployment in this country.

Labour are 80 seats in front of the tories, ask yourself why if things are so good.

For a bit of balance.

Why did nu lab tip the wink to the money men that zero hour contracts were ok?


look back to 1998 or so, when the law was quietly changed. With the help of the tories and nu lib's.

I am not sure where you get the 1998 date from as zero hour contracts have been around for many years before that. In fact I am not that there is any start date for it.

part-time working
while i admit that knowing the (average?) number of hours worked per capita would not be useless info, it should not be forgotten that many women (especially) genuinely wish to work only part-time, for all sorts of good reasons

zero hour contracts
i know it's a hard task, but no one has managed to explain to me why these contracts are regarded by some as being exploitative or similar
i know i've asked before, but what is the difference between these and (my fave!) courier drivers who are obliged by all employers (as far as i can determine) to work as self-employed?

Vince Cable says the figure of 1 million zero hour contracts may be under stated.!!!!!

HMRC 'lost nerve' over big tax avoiders, say MPs
Report highlights how Treasury is owed £35bn in missing tax payments and says HMRC pursued small firms, not global giants

hmrc lost nerve big tax avoiders ..... 'HMRC holds back from using the full range of sanctions at its disposal.'
British officials have "lost their nerve" in tackling tax avoidance by global corporations and have presided over a £35bn tax gap as they pursue easy prey such as small businesses and individuals, a committee of MPs says.

===============

i'll second the above
my accountant is having a battle royal to recover a significant amount of VAT from HMRC
he reports that it is now standard practice for HMRC, especially with regard to VAT, to be as obstructive as possible, refusing to give out phone numbers or e-mail addresses or even responding to letters
it seems that, even when patently in the wrong, HMRC effectively forces the most vigorous pursuit to be undertaken, instead of as in previous times, a sensible phone call or meeting to resolve the issues

easy money to be made by the exchequer of course, as many people will just chuck in the towel

It's rather pointless trying to have an intelligent conversation with a cab driver as we know, so it comes as no surprise that having one with Alf will be shall we say be... A little unrewarding at times.

shows what you know .... if you want to know how a company is doing, talk to the van drivers and others of lowly rank who see and hear far more than most, and who also give an insight into the quality of management

The self employed can offset expenses against earnings.

Zero hour slaves cannot.

...........................

The self employed charge the going rate.

Zero hour slaves get £7 an hour and are taxed at source. No expenses allowed.

courier drivers are TOLD the rate the will get .... if they don't like it, they can move and/or suffer discrimination from the traffic controller ..... to earn £7.00 ph nett, they'll have to work damn hard and that presupposes their office gives them the work ..... however, it is certainly true that if a driver is prepared to work 12 hours a day 6/7 days a week, he may well pick up £800-1,000 pw

by and large, zero hour contractees will not have much if anything by way of tax deductible expenses anyway, for surely they are predominantly office or warehouse centred

As far as I know, Zero hour workers pay tax and NI at source.

They will be lucky to clear £5 an hour.

i don't know if NI cuts in immediately, but of course PAYE does not
and surely, if NI is paid, then state benefits accrue whereas if you are self-employed they do not (i think)

NI is payable from the word go, there is no allowance before you start paying, only an upper limit.

I'm not sure how they work the tax angle, taking into account the variable hours worked and the tax code status of the individual worker.


But the two main points of this exercise is addressed as far as the gov is concerned.

1. A person is off the books as far as unemployment is concerned.

2. Business has a ready pool of labour at very low cost.

except that the biz has to pay NI too
that said, #1 is definitely true

with regard to #2, their are certainly companies who need a pool of labour on which they can draw in times of high demand - and of course the reverse - rather like outworkers in the clothing industry
that said, just as with self-employed, presumably those on zero hour contracts can also work for other companies at the same time
are these people low-cost?
no more so than the self-employed courier or shelf-stacker or similar

'Exclusivity deals' that stop zero-hours workers seeking other jobs face ban

Vince Cable will announce a crackdown on abuse of the controversial employment deals


Nicholas Watt, chief political correspondent

The Guardian, Thursday 19 December 2013



Cable will say: 'We don’t think that people should be tied exclusively to one employer if it unfairly stops them from boosting their income.' Photograph: David Cheskin/PA


Employers could be banned from preventing staff on zero-hours contracts from working elsewhere as part of a crackdown on abuse of the controversial deals, Vince Cable will announce on Wednesday.

A government consultation on zero-hours contracts, designed to prevent misuse by employers, will seek views on whether legislation should be introduced to ban so-called "exclusivity clauses".

Cable will say: "We don't think that people should be tied exclusively to one employer if it unfairly stops them from boosting their income when they are not getting enough work to earn a living.

"We also want to give employees and employers more guidance and advice on these types of employment contracts.

"Employers need flexible workforces and people should have the choice in how they work. But this shouldn't be at the expense of fairness and transparency."

The business secretary announced in his speech to the Liberal Democrat conference in September that he would act against "abusive practices in zero-hours contracts". He highlighted the unfairness of "exclusivity arrangements which prevent workers seeking alternatives, even when they are given no work".

Cable will say that he has no plans to ban zero-hours contracts, which can offer flexibility for some employees who have to look after children or people who want to top up monthly earnings. "We believe they have a place in today's labour market and are not proposing to ban them outright, but we also want to make sure that people are getting a fair deal," he said.


More self serving guff here: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/dec/19/exclusivity-deals-zero-hours-contracts

Zero hour workers get a variety of rates of pay. There is no standard £7 per hour.

'Exclusivity deals' that stop zero-hours workers seeking other jobs face ban
Vince Cable will announce a crackdown on abuse of the controversial employment deals

=============

bloody good job
it's outrageous that a company should be permitted to force such a one-sided contract on their employees
whether or not it could be enforced in a court of law is another matter, but that is effectively irrelevant