Almost half of people on zero-hours contracts want more regular work and greater levels of job security, according to a report from three labour market economists.
It also found that as few as 28% of people on zero-hours contracts worked on that basis to take advantage of the flexibility offered, effectively undermining one of the key arguments for such contracts.
The research from the economists Nikhil Datta, Giulia Giupponi and Stephen Machin, found that almost 30% of workers had no other option but to accept working on a zero-hours contract because of a lack of job opportunities.
The study also uncovered a potential link between companies’ use of zero-hours contracts and the rising national minimum wage – particularly in low-paying sectors of the economy such as home care, hospitality, cleaning and maintenance. The economists said it found “firms exploit the flexibility of zero-hours contracts in order to buffer the wage cost shock induced by the minimum wage increase”, which could help to explain the rising use of the contracts.
The report found a large proportion of workers on zero-hours contracts were paid at, or slightly above, the minimum wage. “Such relatively low pay, coupled with limited and fragmented hours, implies high levels of earnings insecurity for workers whose only option is to work on this type of arrangement.”
Almost a million people in the UK are not guaranteed any hours by their employer, compared with only 200,000 at the turn of the millennium, suggesting that work in Britain has become increasingly precarious.
No comments:
Post a Comment