Zero Hours

[vetran]

Yes but the discussion is about highly skilled staff. You can shaft a McDonalds employee but not a Doctor.

Doctors will negotiate a contract for services, many probably already have. Zero hour contracts give employers too many rights for highly skilled in demand staff.

Also the member of staff will be made responsible for their own training (that would be considered down time) so they would slowly be deskilled. The NHS would end up with a bunch of non english speaking just qualified cardiologists with no skills while BUPA will have the highly trained ones.

[vetran]

Isn't a normal contracting gig (which is for highly skilled, highly [over]paid workers) done on a zero-hours basis? Or is there a special part to it the BBC don't mention?

yes its a contract for service. They are an employee for pay scales and discipline, a contractor for getting paid and turning up probably without any enhancement in hourly rate.

[BlasterBates]

The article talks about Zero hours contracts, but the NHS are not using Zero Hour contracts they're using Casual Hour contracts. A Nurse explains:

don’t think this is right. I have been a bank nurse in UBHT (albeit some time ago). Bank is a casual contract, not a zero hours contract as you define it. I think they have misinterpreted your question.
From the UBHT website:
‘UHBristol has a ‘bank’ of temporary staff. It works in the same way as a temporary employment agency. The bank offers additional and flexible working to existing employees and people who want to work on a temporary/casual basis. Bank employees include nurses and midwives, administrative and clerical roles such as ward clerks, secretaries and outpatient clerks, and ancillary staff, such as porters, cleaners and catering staff.’
Honorary contracts are used for those on clinical placements whilst in training or research, so although they are technically zero hours, they are still not as defined.

Staggering: zero-hours contracts in the NHS | skwalker1964

In a Casual Hour contract you are not obliged to work when requested.

Of course one may criticise it but it isn't the same as a Zero Hours Contract where you're forced to sit at home waiting for a call earnng nothing. The BBC article states Zero Hours Contracts and then talks about Casual Hours Contracts, which is confirmed by the Nurse on the forum.

I personally would welcome a casual hours contract.

[vetran]

The article talks about Zero hours contracts, but the NHS are not using Zero Hour contracts they're using Casual Hour contracts. A Nurse explains:

look at those goalposts go!

slightly different thing, note the majority of 'Bank' employees are not medical they are administrative / support. The Medical are locum status.

[BlasterBates]

look at those goalposts go!

slightly different thing, note the majority of 'Bank' employees are not medical they are administrative / support. The Medical are locum status.

I actually read the BBC article. Surely everyone else who read it would have seen the following:

So critically, the employer's guaranteed ability to deliver the work disappears because the individual is not obliged to work.

Casual contracts are a special case of Zero Hours contracts. But they are quite different from MacDonalds contracts.

So the goal posts haven't moved, it's just now I think the penny has dropped

Debating on whether Doctors will be put on MacDonalds style contracts is pointless because it isn't happening.

But we can debate about casual zero hour contracts.