Quote:Sports Direct: 90% of staff on zero-hour contracts

Retail chain's 20,000 part-time workforce do not know how many hours they will work each week and have no holiday or sick pay

Simon Neville
The Guardian, Sunday 28 July 2013 19.13 BST
Jump to comments (1326)

Sports Direct store on Oxford Street, London
While 20,000 Sports Direct staff are on zero-hour contracts, 2,000 others are about to receive cash bonuses of up to £100,000. Photograph: Mark Richardson/Alamy

Sports Direct's entire 20,000 part-time workforce are employed on zero-hour contracts at a time when 2,000 full-time staff are about to cash in bonuses of up to £100,000.

The contracts, handed to 90% of the company's 23,000 employees, leave staff not knowing how many hours they will work from one week to the next, with no sick pay or holiday pay, and no guarantee of regular work.

Bosses at Sports Direct, the UK's biggest sports retailer, were this month hailing their bonus policy for full-time staff as that of a model employer.

The Guardian has also discovered that the bonus scheme rules give managers the power to exclude a member of staff if they are considered an "unsatisfactory performer", although they do not precisely define this term and it could be subject to abuse, according to employment lawyers.

About 20 current staff are known to have been excluded from the scheme already, while others who had been excluded have since left, according to the Unite union.

The four biggest supermarkets in Britain, Tesco, Asda, Sainsbury's and Morrisons, said they do not use zero-hour contracts. Other retailers to confirm that they do not employ staff on these terms include Argos, B&Q, Homebase, John Lewis and Marks & Spencer.

Politicians have been campaigning to ban the contracts and have called on Mike Ashley, the billionaire owner of Sports Direct, to consider introducing part-time contracts with guaranteed hours.

Former and current part-time staff have also spoken out against zero hours, stressing the uncertainty created by the contracts, under which work can be cut with less than a day's notice. Others said regional managers may reduce staff hours if targets are not met.

Meanwhile, some staff still entitled to the bonus which pays out in the form of shares next month have suggested it has created a culture of fear that they may lose out if they are deemed to be "unsatisfactory".

Andy Sawford, the Labour MP for Corby, who has submitted a private member's bill to try to ban the use of zero-hour contracts, said: "It would be much better for Sports Direct to instead of offering bonus gimmicks, they should offer their staff the security of proper contracts.

"The zero-hours contracts are highly exploitative and suit the company because it keeps people in a fragile state where they are at the beck and call of their employers."

Alison McGovern, the Labour MP for Wirral South, is also campaigning for businesses to offer fewer such contracts.

She said: "It seems quite bizarre that a company would on the one hand be awarding bonuses in this way, and treating other staff in a completely different way.

"I would want Sports Direct to see if there is a possibility of more fixed term contracts. It appears this has been imposed across the board and is inappropriate. How can there be any investment in employees, or training or progression?

"Lots of workers in retail start off part-time on the shop floor and rise to the top, but with zero-hour contracts there is no incentive at all."

Some 2,000 permanent full-time staff who have been with Sports Direct since 2008 are to get a bonus paid in shares worth about £75,000 each for hitting profit targets. A similar payout, of shares worth about £17,500, was awarded last year.

Sports Direct's chief executive, Dave Forsey, told the Guardian at the time: "The share scheme glues this company together. These schemes are typically only for the executives, but this goes deep into the company. I'm surprised more businesses haven't adopted something like this sooner."

The Guardian has seen a copy of the share scheme rules, stating it is "intended to drive group performance and to motivate and retain permanent employees at all levels of the group, and to align the interests of those employees with those of shareholders".

However, the document adds that employees can be excluded from the scheme.

It says that any "participant who is determined to be an unsatisfactory performer" will not get the shares.

"For the purposes of the scheme, an unsatisfactory performer means a participant who at any time during the period between the grand date of his award and any relevant vesting date has been (a) notified in writing that his performance is unsatisfactory, or he has been given a written warning or other sanction under the company's disciplinary policy in place from time to time, or (b) suspended from his employment by reason of suspected gross misconduct."

By comparison, John Lewis, which runs one of the best-known employee bonus schemes in the country as part of its partnership structure, pays all employees a bonus regardless of disciplinary warnings against them.

Employment lawyers have said the wording is too vague and could be abused.

David Cohen, consultant solicitor at Keystone Law, said: "It is unusual under an all-employee share scheme for the directors to have the power to deprive continuing employees, as opposed to 'bad leavers', of their share awards.

"If workers generally became aware that the scheme was being operated in a capricious and arbitrary way, the company would risk frittering away the reputational and motivational advantages of putting in place such a generous scheme."

Sports Direct declined to comment.

David Guyatt Wrote:Stop buying from them in protest.

If everyone did they'd realize that some profit is better than no profit at all.

Quote:Buckingham Palace uses zero-hours contracts for summer staff

The 350 part-time workers deployed during summer opening of royal family's London residence have no guaranteed work


Simon Neville, Matthew Taylor and Phillip Inman
The Guardian, Tuesday 30 July 2013 21.23 BST
Jump to comments (102)

Buckingham Palace is employing workers on 'zero-hours' contracts. Photograph: Oli Scarff/Getty Images Europe

Buckingham Palace, a leading cinema chain and one of Britain's best known art galleries are among a group of high profile employers who sign staff up to so-called "zero-hours" contracts to keep employment costs at a minimum.

Two days after it emerged that retailer Sports Direct employs 20,000 staff on zero-hours terms, the Guardian has established that the royal family's London residence, along with Cineworld and the Tate galleries, hire workers under the controversial employment practice.

The 350 part-time employees deployed as extra staff during Buckingham Palace's summer opening have no guaranteed hours. They work in the shop, greet visitors, and work as monitors in the rooms made open to the public.

All of Cineworld's part-time multiplex staff are on zero-hours contracts, as are all catering staff at the Tate galleries in London, Liverpool and St Ives, Cornwall.

Buckingham Palace opened its doors to the public earlier this week, but all the temporary staff hired to run the State Rooms attraction, which includes a Diamond Jubilee exhibition, are forced to sign contracts which give them no guarantee of any work. However, although the contract leaves staff with no promise of work, they are not allowed to work for any other employee without written permission from the palace.

A copy of a staff contract seen by the Guardian, dated 2009, says: "Your hours of work will be advised by the visitor manager and will be dependent upon the requirements for retail assistants at Buckingham Palace as and when required.

"You are employed to work exclusively for Royal Collection Enterprises Limited [a Palace subsidiary] and if you wish to seek secondary employment you must first obtain the written consent of your Head of Department."

A spokeswoman for the palace said the contracts did not guarantee any amount of work, but said rotas were drawn up a month in advance for staff to plan their hours.

But she declined to characterise them as zero-hours contracts: "All temporary staff employed during the summer opening of Buckingham Palace are issued with fixed-term employment contracts for a three-or four-month period. These are not zero-hours contracts."

The palace argues that because the staff are entitled to certain benefits on days when they are called in, such as a free hot or cold lunch, holiday pay and uniforms, amongst other benefits, they cannot be described as zero-hours.

The Office for National Statistics estimates that 200,000 staff work on zero-hours contracts. But experts now believe the true number is far higher.

Cineworld, the UK's second biggest cinema chain with 80 sites across the country, uses zero-hours contracts exclusively for its entire part-time workforce at its multiplexes. With 4,500 employees working at the cinemas and in head office, it is thought that up to 80% are on zero-hours contracts.

Cineworld declined to comment.

The Tate galleries catering service, which uses work across Tate Britain, Tate Modern, Tate Liverpool and Tate St Ives, has also been found to employ all part time staff on zero-hours contracts. A spokesman confirmed that only zero-hours contracts are used but declined to comment further.

The use of the contracts has exploded across the UK in recent years as employers look to employ workers on the most flexible terms within the boundaries of the law.

However, the contracts leave staff without guaranteed hours, sick pay or holiday pay, and make it difficult to get a tenancy agreement, credit card or loan because proving regular income becomes impossible.

The contracts leave workers vulnerable to sudden reduction in shift patterns and last-minute shift cancellations at the discretion of managers. Dozens of staff on zero-hours contracts have told the Guardian that if they do not make themselves available for work they are unlikely to receive shifts for the rest of the month.

The latest revelations prompted trade unions and politicians to condemn the phenomenon and questionofficial estimates of how many workers have jobs with no guaranteed income.

Dave Prentis, general secretary of the Unison union, called for the contracts to be made illegal due to the damage they cause to families.

He said: "Zero-hours contracts should be outlawed entirely. They wind the clock back to the bad old days of people standing at the factory gates, waiting to be picked for a day's work. Many people on zero-hours contracts are on the lowest wages in our economy, making them the least able to cope with financial shocks like a drastic cut in hours from one week to the next. This has a damaging impact on family life, and on people's spending bad news for our economy and our society."

Sources suggest that ministers are currently unworried by the revelations and have no plans to introduce a ban.

But Vince Cable, the business secretary, said: "Whilst it's important our workforce remains flexible, it is equally important that it is treated fairly. This is why I have asked my officials to undertake some work over the summer to better understand how this type of contract is working in practice today."

Campaign groups have also flooded Sports Direct with emails demanding they give staff the option of fixed hour contracts after all 20,000 part time staff were revealed to be on zero hour contracts, and protests outside stores are planned for this weekend.

Quote:Zero-hours contracts could be subject to new legislation, says Vince Cable

Business secretary says employer exclusivity is main issue for review, as figures show one million are on zero-hours deals

Patrick Wintour, political editor
theguardian.com, Monday 5 August 2013 14.32 BST
Jump to comments (365)

Link to video: Vince Cable: government to review zero-hours contracts

Vince Cable has said the government could legislate on zero-hours contracts, but ruled out a ban.

The business secretary, who has been leading a review on the issue for the government since June, said he might look at changing the rules for workers who were allowed to work for only one employer.

"Where it is a problem is … where there is an exclusive relationship with a particular employer who actually cannot provide stable employment, or indeed any employment that stops the worker going to another company," he said.

"If we were to narrow it down to the exclusivity issue, and established whether it is a legal problem and how widespread it is, but I'm holding open the possibility that next month when we come to the decision then we could move forward with recommendations to consult on legislation, but we haven't got to that point yet."

Cable currently has three people in his department looking at the issue and will decide in September whether to hold a formal consultation on specific proposals. No 10 denied that the government was not acting with sufficient urgency.

A report (pdf) by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development claims one million workers are on zero-hours contracts far more than the 250,000 official estimate from the Office for National Statistics.

The ONS admits there may be problems with its survey, and intends to produce a new one based on different questioning techniques next spring and summer.

Labour said it would hold a summit on zero-hours this week to look at the scale of abuse. Chuka Umanna, the shadow business secretary, has said zero-hours contracts should be the exception and not the rule, a formula that at one level means little since zero-hours contracts are already the exception in the UK economy.

The shadow health secretary, Andy Burnham, has called for them to be banned, something that would prove unpopular with employers and even some workers.

George Osborne welcomed the zero-hours review and pointed to the broader economic climate, saying: "We will make sure that [zero-hours] contracts are used in a proper way … but obviously the best solution for people who want to work more hours is to have a growing economy, and that's absolutely what we're setting about trying to achieve.

"What we want is a flexible labour market so people can get jobs, come out of unemployment and find work. Of course we do not want employment contracts abused."

He noted that the total number of hours worked in the economy had increased. "Let us see if there is a problem before we try to fix it," he said.

He also stressed that labour market flexibility was a way of respecting the rights of those not in work, adding that such people did not have people speaking up for them.

Peter Lemkin Wrote:Along with the zero hour contract....how'z about a zero pay contract clause....i.e. slavery. That is where we're headed...so let's get on with it! mallprint: The quicker these things come [and not slowly ratcheted up], the more obvious and the greater will be the reaction/revolution. Time to stop the tourists at the Tower of London and putting some of the 'Business Magnets' and Politicians in there!