Zero hours contracts

[DodgyAgent]

Rubbish! You think any of those 1.2m want a zero hour contract? They are so desperate they will take anything. Plenty of people want to work but cannot. Yes there are some work shy. But the vast majority of people are not like that.

I am not accusing anyone of being workshy. I am saying that they are simply making the wrong choices.

If you were one of the 1.2 million what would you do?

[AtW]

You do have a choice. the fact that you have chosen to work in the world of zero hour contracts is a choice in itself.

No, if they had a choice they would never pick such tulip jobs.

It's almost like being on call all the time to be dragged to work for short period of time - this should only be possible is premium is paid for flexibility business gets, then it's all fair.

[DodgyAgent]

No, if they had a choice they would never pick such tulip jobs.

It's almost like being on call all the time to be dragged to work for short period of time - this should only be possible is premium is paid for flexibility business gets, then it's all fair.

And what makes you think they do not like working on these jobs? and I am sorry but it is fair unless you have a better alternative - which I presume would amount to state interference.

[BrilloPad]

And what makes you think they do not like working on these jobs? and I am sorry but it is fair unless you have a better alternative - which I presume would amount to state interference.

Do you really think ANYONE likes working like that? Get real.

And the alternative is for the government to reduce state interfereance and create jobs so that no-one has to accept contracts like this which belong in a Dickens novel.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Neither. Worthwhile jobs for everyone by setting up economic conditions where businesses can thrive. Little red tape and low tax . I weould also support trade tariffs - though it might be too late for that.

Good idea in principal but lower taxes are not feasible while the welfare state and public sector are so bloated and most of the red tape comes from Brussels

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

No, if they had a choice they would never pick such tulip jobs.

It's almost like being on call all the time to be dragged to work for short period of time - this should only be possible is premium is paid for flexibility business gets, then it's all fair.

Why is there no choice?

[DodgyAgent]

Do you really think ANYONE likes working like that? Get real.

And the alternative is for the government to reduce state interfereance and create jobs so that no-one has to accept contracts like this which belong in a Dickens novel.

I am sure 99% of people would like to work a 20 hour week earning a £1 million a month. I am pretty sure that if you walk up to someone working on a zero hour week and told them they should not have to they would probably tell you to get lost and mind your own business.

Anyway answer the question.. what would you do if faced with such a situation?

You may call it Dickensian but it seems to be the norm in Asia. As I said you people with your liberal pampered view of the world have little notion of any alternative.

[doodab]

The whole point of a flexible labour market is that it can adapt. If all the best people working on zero hour contracts go and get better jobs elsewhere then the employer will have to change his employment contracts accordingly.

And it can equally well adapt in the opposite direction. If the number of good jobs available is low relative to the number of people and most jobs are tulipty low wage, low security jobs then there is no alternative for most of the "best" people to take, so you have more "incentivised" people competing for the tulipty jobs and employers can take even bigger liberties.

Of course in reality it only works in one direction because when this lovely flexible market stands to benefit those who work hard at the expense of big business we open our borders to keep the supply of cheap and desperate people topped up.

The fundamental problem here is the relative value of financial and human capital, and that is (IMO) a result of capital having a non-zero opportunity cost.

[DodgyAgent]

And it can equally well adapt in the opposite direction. If the number of good jobs available is low relative to the number of people and most jobs are tulipty low wage, low security jobs then there is no alternative for most of the "best" people to take, so you have more "incentivised" people competing for the tulipty jobs and employers can take even bigger liberties.

Of course in reality it only works in one direction because when this lovely flexible market stands to benefit those who work hard at the expense of big business we open our borders to keep the supply of cheap and desperate people topped up.

The fundamental problem here is the relative value of financial and human capital, and that is (IMO) a result of capital having a non-zero opportunity cost.

So what would you do to change things then? And are you saying that employees that are much in demand do not exploit their positions to get better conditions?

[doodab]

As I said you people with your liberal pampered view of the world have little notion of any alternative.

Has it occurred to you that people have understanding and experience of the alternatives and are choosing to embrace the best one?