4th December 2011, 08:08 AM
Precisely on Tom Wilson's point....it should be possible to claim JSA allowance whilst on a zero-hours contract but it may come down to 'discussing' with the relevant benefits officer as to whether you are really available for work.....
I suspect however that any archaeological employer using a Zero Hour contract is either extremely philanthropic or does not understand employment law. There are many benefits to employees of being on a ZHC. The main advantage is that you can claim continuity of employment for redundancy and other employment benefit reasons, irrespective of whether you are being paid, irrespective of whether you do any work. It would to the advantage of any archaeologist to sign up with as many archaeological employers as possible on such contracts. It doesn't guarantee you work, but you could for example still claim paid holiday, paid sick leave, redundancy payments etc etc. I suspect that what archaeological employers really want to offer in such instances are Casual employment contracts rather than zero-hours contracts, but that of course then offers the worker the chance to turn down work and they are not obligated to take work at short notice.
After one year on ZHC or after a combination of ZHC and full work contracts a worker is entitled to claim unfair dismissal and after 2 years redundancy payments. Employers using such contracts may be under legal obligation to offer any vacant 'fullwork' contracts to their ZHC staff first or possibly be subject to a claim of unfair or unequal treatment of staff. It is also important for workers to realise that for redundancy purposes they are not casual workers and cannot be dismissed as such but have the right to be considered under the same terms and conditions and considerations as other workers who may have more regular employment contracts.
If I were a trade unionist at an archaeological organisation introducing ZHC I would be pushing to establish set procedures and complete transparency as to the obligations on both employers and employees under such contracts.
I suspect however that any archaeological employer using a Zero Hour contract is either extremely philanthropic or does not understand employment law. There are many benefits to employees of being on a ZHC. The main advantage is that you can claim continuity of employment for redundancy and other employment benefit reasons, irrespective of whether you are being paid, irrespective of whether you do any work. It would to the advantage of any archaeologist to sign up with as many archaeological employers as possible on such contracts. It doesn't guarantee you work, but you could for example still claim paid holiday, paid sick leave, redundancy payments etc etc. I suspect that what archaeological employers really want to offer in such instances are Casual employment contracts rather than zero-hours contracts, but that of course then offers the worker the chance to turn down work and they are not obligated to take work at short notice.
After one year on ZHC or after a combination of ZHC and full work contracts a worker is entitled to claim unfair dismissal and after 2 years redundancy payments. Employers using such contracts may be under legal obligation to offer any vacant 'fullwork' contracts to their ZHC staff first or possibly be subject to a claim of unfair or unequal treatment of staff. It is also important for workers to realise that for redundancy purposes they are not casual workers and cannot be dismissed as such but have the right to be considered under the same terms and conditions and considerations as other workers who may have more regular employment contracts.
If I were a trade unionist at an archaeological organisation introducing ZHC I would be pushing to establish set procedures and complete transparency as to the obligations on both employers and employees under such contracts.
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...