Outlaw exclusivity clauses in zero-hours contracts, say recruiters
13 March 2014
With the consultation period for the government’s proposals on zero-hours contracts coming to an end today, recruitment professionals tell Recruiter that they support the idea of outlawing the practice of workers on these contracts not being allowed to work for another employer.
Thu, 13 Mar 2014With the consultation period for the government’s proposals on zero-hours contracts coming to an end today, recruitment professionals tell Recruiter that they support the idea of outlawing the practice of workers on these contracts not being allowed to work for another employer.
Exclusivity clauses were one of the key areas of concern highlighted by business secretary Vince Cable when he launched the consultation in December 2013. Under these clauses, workers are not allowed to work for another employer, even when they are not offered work by their primary employer.
“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,” said Cable.
Andy Hogarth, chief executive officer of recruitment and outsourcing company Staffline Group, tells Recruiter that exclusivity agreements are unfair. “I absolutely agree that employers shouldn’t be allowed exclusivity. Unless the worker is being offered 37.5 hours a week they should be allowed to go elsewhere.”
Kate Shoesmith, head of policy at the Recruitment & Employment Confederation (REC), tells Recruiter that in principle the trade body isn’t against outlawing exclusivity clauses. However, she questions the extent to which such clauses exist in reality. “We couldn’t find any instances,” she says.
Shoesmith says she is optimistic about the outcome of the consultation process. “Nobody is trying to ban them [zero-hours contracts]. All the political parties say they would like them to continue and they understand why it is important for both individuals and business,” she says.
Zero-hours contracts became a hot issue last year, with Labour leader Ed Miliband calling a review into their use, and companies including Sports Direct, McDonald’s, Randstad and even Buckingham Place coming under fire.
McDonald’s tells Recruiter that most of its 97,000 staff are on zero-hours contracts, but says it doesn’t wish to comment on the consultation before the outcome is announced. “Our views will be represented in the consultation via the relevant trade bodies, the Confederation of British Industry and the British Retail Consortium,” a spokesperson tells Recruiter.
However, in a statement it argues the benefits of zero-hours contracts: “We pride ourselves on being a flexible employer and for many of our employees that’s why they have chosen us as their place of work. Many of our employees are parents or students who are looking to fit flexible, paid work around childcare, study and other commitments.
“During every application process, prospective employees are asked to indicate how many hours and what days they are available to work which enables us to take on the range of full and part-time staff needed to run our business effectively, and means we do not take on additional staff if we cannot give them hours to work. Employee hours are scheduled in advance and we never ask people to be ‘on call’. The zero-hours contracts which all our hourly-paid employees are on do not affect employee benefit entitlement and all of our employees are entitled to a range of benefits including holiday allowance, employee discounts and access to a range of training and qualifications.”
Exclusivity clauses were one of the key areas of concern highlighted by business secretary Vince Cable when he launched the consultation in December 2013. Under these clauses, workers are not allowed to work for another employer, even when they are not offered work by their primary employer.
“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,” said Cable.
Andy Hogarth, chief executive officer of recruitment and outsourcing company Staffline Group, tells Recruiter that exclusivity agreements are unfair. “I absolutely agree that employers shouldn’t be allowed exclusivity. Unless the worker is being offered 37.5 hours a week they should be allowed to go elsewhere.”
Kate Shoesmith, head of policy at the Recruitment & Employment Confederation (REC), tells Recruiter that in principle the trade body isn’t against outlawing exclusivity clauses. However, she questions the extent to which such clauses exist in reality. “We couldn’t find any instances,” she says.
Shoesmith says she is optimistic about the outcome of the consultation process. “Nobody is trying to ban them [zero-hours contracts]. All the political parties say they would like them to continue and they understand why it is important for both individuals and business,” she says.
Zero-hours contracts became a hot issue last year, with Labour leader Ed Miliband calling a review into their use, and companies including Sports Direct, McDonald’s, Randstad and even Buckingham Place coming under fire.
McDonald’s tells Recruiter that most of its 97,000 staff are on zero-hours contracts, but says it doesn’t wish to comment on the consultation before the outcome is announced. “Our views will be represented in the consultation via the relevant trade bodies, the Confederation of British Industry and the British Retail Consortium,” a spokesperson tells Recruiter.
However, in a statement it argues the benefits of zero-hours contracts: “We pride ourselves on being a flexible employer and for many of our employees that’s why they have chosen us as their place of work. Many of our employees are parents or students who are looking to fit flexible, paid work around childcare, study and other commitments.
“During every application process, prospective employees are asked to indicate how many hours and what days they are available to work which enables us to take on the range of full and part-time staff needed to run our business effectively, and means we do not take on additional staff if we cannot give them hours to work. Employee hours are scheduled in advance and we never ask people to be ‘on call’. The zero-hours contracts which all our hourly-paid employees are on do not affect employee benefit entitlement and all of our employees are entitled to a range of benefits including holiday allowance, employee discounts and access to a range of training and qualifications.”
Earlier this week, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) called for caution after its own figures revealed that almost 583,000 people are currently employed on zero-hour contracts – representing a huge jump on 183,000 in 2010.
