UK workers on zero-hours contracts rise above 800,000

The number of workers on zero-hours contracts has increased by more than 100,000 over the past 12 months to exceed 800,000 for the first time, official figures show.

Figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) showed that 801,000 workers, or 2.5% of the employed UK workforce, were on zero-hours contracts in the quarter to last December, up by 15% or 697,000 from the same period of 2014.

The data showed there were about 1.7m such contracts in November, indicating that many workers have more than one zero-hours contract. The increase renewed fears that employers are using cheap casual labour to cut costs and avoid commitments to their workforce.

Opponents of the contract, which does not offer a minimum number of hours, argue they show workers have emerged from the recession in a weakened state, allowing employers to replace stable jobs with a precarious workforce. Zero-hours contracts are disproportionately offered to more vulnerable workers with weak bargaining power in sectors such as hotels and food services, health and social work.

People on zero-hours contracts were more likely to be young, part-time, women, or in full-time education compared with other people in employment. The ONS said it did not have data to show which industries employed the extra 104,000 people on the contracts in the past year.

An average zero-hours contract provides 26 hours of employment a weekand one in three of those on ZHCs wanted to work more hours. The ONS said that figures compares with just 10% of those in stable employment who wanted more hours.

The TUC said average weekly earnings for zero-hours workers are £188, compared with £479 for permanent workers.

The TUC general secretary, Frances O’Grady, said: “Zero-hours contracts may be a dream for cost-cutting employers, but they can be a nightmare for workers. Many people on zero-hours contracts are unable to plan for their future and regularly struggle with paying bills and having a decent family life.

“The so-called flexibility these contracts offer is far too one-sided. Staff without guaranteed pay have much less power to stand up for their rights and often feel afraid to turn down shifts in case they fall out of favour with their boss.”

She said the EU was proposing better rights for zero-hours workers, adding to concerns workers should have about the risks of Britain voting to leave the EU at June’s referendum.

The ONS said the increase in people saying they were on zero-hours could partly be due to increased use of the term, causing respondents to recognise their jobs as falling into the category. But the ONS said the figures showed zero-hours contracts remained prevalent despite their controversial status and the coalition government outlawing contracts that held people to working for one company.

The Institute of Directors, a right-leaning employers group, said opposition to the contracts was overdone and that they worked well for most people who want flexible working hours. Employers that have faced criticism for using the contracts range from the retailer Sports Direct to Everyman, the upmarket cinema group.

Seamus Nevin, the IoD’s head of employment and skills, said: “One of the reasons that UK employment figures remained so impressive despite the financial crisis is because employers have been able to adopt zero-hours contracts instead of having to make redundancies. Flexibility is a good thing, and the current balance is working well for both workers and employers.”

Nevin pointed to ONS figures showing the percentage of employers using zero-hours contracts coming down from 13% in January 2014 to 11% last May and 10% in November. But Mark Chandler, an ONS statistician, said the overall level was probably unchanged and that the apparent decline was accounted for by rough early figures and margin for error.

Jon Ingham of jobs site Glassdoor said the figures highlighted the insecure state of young people coming into employment as workers rights are eroded.

He said: “The most common reason that unemployed people turn down zero-hours contracts is the need for a guaranteed level of income to make this a viable alternative to receiving unemployment benefit. These contracts favour the employers over the employees.

“With 38% of these contracts held by 16-to-24-year-olds, it means there is now a significant proportion of the young workforce without guaranteed incomes.”