Policy report
December 2015
Zero-hours and
short-hours
contracts
in the UK: Employer and
employee perspectives
The CIPD is the professional body for HR and people
development. The not-for-profit organisation champions
better work and working lives and has been setting the
benchmark for excellence in people and organisation
development for more than 100 years. It has 140,000
members across the world, provides thought leadership
through independent research on the world of work, and
oers professional training and accreditation for those
working in HR and learning and development.
1 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
1 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Zero-hours and short-hours contracts
in the UK: Employer and employee
perspectives
Policy report
Acknowledgements 1
Foreword 2
Glossary 3
Executive summary 4
Introduction 10
Employer perspectives 13
Employee perspectives 26
Conclusions 37
References 41
Endnotes 42
Contents
Acknowledgements
The CIPD is grateful to David Freeman and Mark Chandler at the Office for National Statistics for
providing unpublished analyses of the Labour Force Survey.
The Labour Market Outlook and Employee Outlook surveys used in this report were administered by
YouGov and the CIPD is grateful to Ian Neale and Laura Piggott at YouGov for advice on the use of the
survey data in this report. The CIPD also thanks all the respondents who gave their time to contribute
to these surveys.
Any errors that remain are entirely the CIPD’s responsibility.
2 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 3 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Zero-hours contracts remain
controversial, but the number
of people on them is increasing
and they look set to become a
permanent feature of the UK
labour market.
The CIPD has made a leading
contribution to understanding
of zero-hours contracts and our
research has been quoted by
government, employers and unions
– both supporters and opponents
of zero-hours contracts.
Zero-hours contracts have
sometimes, it seems, been singled
out as an especially unfair form
of employment. In our view, this
is unjustified. Our research shows
that zero-hours contracts appear
to work well for many of those
on them. But they are not for
everybody and that’s why zero-
hours contract workers need to
understand their employment
rights as well as how these
contracts are likely to work in
practice. Zero-hours contracts
work best when there’s an element
of give and take, a recognition that
flexibility works both ways. A small
minority of employers using them
don’t seem to recognise this, but
there are many ‘permanent’ jobs
where the actions of employers
can make them anything but
secure. There may be too much
emphasis at times on the precise
terms of the employment contract
with not enough attention given to
the spirit in which the employment
relationship is conducted.
We have updated our estimate
of the number of zero-hours
contracts from about 1 million
in 2013 to about 1.3 million in
the spring and summer of 2015.
Otherwise, this research has
produced very similar results. On
average, employees on zero-hours
contracts are as satisfied with
their jobs as other employees and
report similar levels of well-being.
While they may be less likely to
feel involved at work and see
fewer opportunities to develop and
improve their skills, they are also
less likely to feel overloaded and
under excessive pressure.
This report also presents
comparable data for those
employed on short-hours
contracts, defined here as jobs
that guarantee up to eight
hours’ work a week. This is a
smaller group of about 400,000
employees who are qualitatively
different from zero-hours contract
employees in terms of their
working patterns and working
hours. They are also more satisfied
with their situation than any other
group of workers we identified in
our Employee Outlook survey.
Our message to employers –
including our members – is to
think carefully about whether
or not these types of contracts
are suitable for your business.
This involves broader issues than
whether or not they help you
match demand to supply. For
example, do they help strengthen
your working culture and your
employer brand?
Our message to employees on
these contracts, and those thinking
about taking one, is to find out
exactly what you are being asked
to agree to, what your rights and
responsibilities are and how these
types of work are used in practice.
Ask questions such as whether
there is a minimum notice period
when work is withdrawn and, if this
does occur, whether you would
be compensated for any costs
incurred.
Our message to government
and the policy community is
that heavy-handed changes to
the law, such as attempts to
abolish zero-hours contracts,
are likely to be both ineffective
and counterproductive. But the
research does raise issues about
employment status, access to
employment rights and the
treatment of zero-hours contract
employees. Modest, targeted
changes to current legislation
may be an option worth further
discussion, but the best way to
improve the working lives of
people on zero-hours contracts
is to help employers develop
working practices that are both
flexible and fair.
Peter Cheese
CIPD Chief Executive
Foreword
3 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Discussions of the advantages and disadvantages of different forms of work sometimes lack precision on
terminology and definitions. Below are explanations of the terminology used in this report (any deviations
from these are highlighted in the report). These do not necessarily match corresponding legal concepts.
Employee An employee is anyone in work who does not regard themselves
as self-employed. Both CIPD and ONS surveys do not identify the
‘worker’ category that appears in employment law.
Full-time employee Any employee who says their work is full-time or who usually works
30 or more hours each week.
Part-time employee Any employee who says their work is part-time or who usually works
for less than 30 hours each week.
Short-hours contracts Employment where the employer guarantees a small minimum
number of hours each week and where the employer has the option
of offering additional hours (which the employee may have the option
of being able to refuse). This report uses eight hours a week as the
upper limit on what constitutes a ‘small’ number of hours.
Temporary employment Employment which is not permanent (as defined by the employee).
Zero-hours contract There is no generally accepted definition of a zero-hours contract.
CIPD guidance uses the following definition: ‘an agreement between
two parties that one may be asked to perform work for the other but
there is no set minimum number of hours. The contract will provide
what pay the individual will get if he or she does work and will deal
with the circumstances in which work may be offered (and, possibly,
turned down)’ (CIPD 2013c).
New government guidance describes a zero-hours contract as ‘one
in which the employer does not guarantee the individual any hours of
work. The employer offers the individual work when it arises, and the
individual can either accept the work offered, or decide not to take up
the offer of work on that occasion’ (BIS 2015).
Although the lack of any guaranteed minimum hours of work is
common to both definitions, the government definition suggests
that individuals are able to decline offers of work whereas the CIPD
definition recognises this may not always be the case.
Glossary
4 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 5 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
This report updates and extends
the analysis of zero-hours contract
work presented in the previous
CIPD report Zero-hours Contracts:
Myth and reality.
In addition, it presents data on
short-hours contract working. As
with zero-hours contracts, there is
no universally accepted definition
of a short-hours contract. This
report uses a guaranteed minimum
of eight hours a week as the upper
limit for a short-hours contract.
The report is based upon
analysis of survey data from both
employers and employees.
The employer perspective is
provided by the CIPD’s quarterly
Labour Market Outlook (LMO), a
representative sample survey of
all employers in the UK with two
or more employees. Questions
on zero-hours and short-hours
contracts were included in the
surveys conducted in the spring
and summer of 2015, which
generated responses from 1,013
employers and 931 employers
respectively.
The Labour Force Survey (LFS)
collects data on employees with
zero-hours contracts. This has been
supplemented with data from the
CIPD’s summer 2015 Employee
Outlook (EO) survey, which
generated responses from 2,572
employees.
Zero-hours contracts
Employer perspective
According to the LMO surveys
conducted in spring and summer
2015, about a quarter of employers
use zero-hours contracts, little
changed from the 2013 estimate
of 23%.
Employers generally use zero-
hours contracts for a relatively
small proportion of the workforce.
Over half of employers use them
for less than 20% of the workforce
– with the mean percentage
covered being 19.7%.
A best estimate for the number of
zero-hours contract employees at
spring/summer 2015 is 1.3 million,
which is an increase from the
previous estimate of 1 million in
2013.
Employers in the public and
voluntary sectors are more likely
to use zero-hours contracts than
private sector employers. Zero-
hours contracts are most often
used by employers in hotels,
accommodation and food, health
and social work (which includes
social care), education and the
voluntary sector.
Large organisations are much more
likely than small organisations to
use zero-hours contracts.
Employers use zero-hours contract
workers in a variety of roles. The
jobs most commonly mentioned
by employers are in administrative
and support roles, care work,
cleaning and various hospitality-
related functions, although some
more skilled jobs (nursing, IT,
teaching) are also mentioned quite
regularly.
The mean number of hours
usually worked by zero-hours
contract workers is 19.4 hours a
week. Although 70% of employers
typically employ them for 20
hours or less each week, 20% of
employers typically employ them
for 30 or more hours each week.
Over two-fifths of employers
(44%) say that working hours are
driven largely by the employer,
with 15% emphasising the role
of the individual. The remaining
employers focus on the variability
and unpredictability of working
time.
The most common reasons for
using zero-hours contracts are to
manage fluctuations in demand
(mentioned by 66% of employers),
provide flexibility for the individual
(51%) and provide cover for
absences (48%). Reducing costs
is a specific objective for 21% of
employers.
Almost half (47%) of employers
using zero-hours contracts see
them as a long-term feature of
their workforce strategy, likely to
still be in use in four or more years’
time.
Most employers of zero-hours
contract staff (67%) classify them
as employees, with 19% classifying
them as workers, 5% as self-
employed, 6% not classifying their
status and 1% unaware – very
similar responses to those given in
2013.
Over four-fifths (81%) of employers
provide zero-hours contract
workers with a written contract,
although 8% do not provide a
contract and 8% say it varies,
with 3% unsure because workers
are supplied by a recruitment
Executive summary
5 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
‘More than half of
employers (58%)
give zero-hours
contract workers
the contractual
freedom to turn
work down and
say they honour
this in practice.’
agency. Where a written contract is
provided, 86% of these employers
say it records employment status.
More than half of employers (58%)
give zero-hours contract workers
the contractual freedom to turn
work down and say they honour
this in practice. However, a fifth of
employers (21%) say that contracts
give workers the right to turn work
down when, in practice, they are
always or sometimes expected to
accept all work offered. A further
14% say their zero-hours contracts
do not allow employees to turn
work down.
Two-thirds (66%) of employers
have some form of policy or
practice on notice of termination,
compared with 55% in 2013. Less
than half of employers (45%) say
they have policies or practices
when it comes to cancelling a shift.
Almost two-thirds (63%) of
employers pay zero-hours contract
employees about the same hourly
rate as employees on a permanent
contract doing the same job. Some
employers (16%) pay a higher rate
and others (9%) pay a lower rate.
Over four-fifths (82%) of employers
using zero-hours contract workers
say they are eligible for company
training and development, with just
13% saying this is not the case.
Employers are most likely to say
people on zero-hours contracts are
entitled to annual paid leave (61%),
the right to receive a statement
of written terms and conditions
(59%) and the statutory minimum
notice period (57%). Reported
entitlements have generally little
changed since 2013, although
there has been a noticeable
increase in the proportion of
employers saying zero-hours
contract workers are entitled to
pension auto-enrolment, up from
38% in 2013 to 48% in 2015.
Only 6% of employers using
zero-hours contract workers even
occasionally prohibit them from
working for another company. This
suggests that the prohibition of
exclusivity clauses is unlikely to
affect many employers.
Employee perceptions
According to the LFS, the number
of people on zero-hours contracts
has almost tripled in less than
three years, from 252,000 in
October–December 2012 to
744,000 by April–June 2015 (46%
men, 54% women). Much of this
reported increase may be due to
greater public awareness of zero-
hours contracts.
Exactly one-quarter of zero-hours
contract employees are students
still in full-time education, which
helps to explain why a third of
zero-hours contract employees
are aged under 25. One-fifth of
zero-hours contract employees are
aged 25–34, another fifth are aged
35–49, and just under a quarter are
aged 50 or over.
The mean number of hours usually
worked each week by zero-hours
contract employees in April–June
2015 is 25.1 hours. The majority
(59%) of zero-hours contract
employees do not want to work
more hours, compared with 88% of
all those in employment.
According to the summer 2015
EO, the mean number of hours
usually worked each week by zero-
hours contract employees is 23.9
hours, almost identical to the 2013
estimate of 23.7 hours. Just over
half (52%) of zero-hours contract
employees usually work for less
than 25 hours a week, although
one-seventh (14%) work for longer
than 40 hours each week.
Almost three-fifths (59%) of zero-
hours contract employees describe
themselves as part-time workers.
6 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 7 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
The vast majority (88%) of these
say it is their choice to work part-
time. Nevertheless, 22% of these
‘voluntary’ part-time employees
on zero-hours contracts would
like additional hours. The most
common reason for not working
more hours is a perception that
employers are unable to offer more
hours (mentioned by 81% of zero-
hours contract employees wanting
to work more hours).
The proportion of zero-hours
contract employees describing
their job as temporary (rather
than permanent) is 37%. A little
over half (57%) of temporary zero-
hours contract employees say this
is their choice (although a few of
these would prefer a permanent
contract). The vast majority (87%)
of those who say their temporary
status is not their choice would
prefer a permanent contract.
According to the LFS, mean
earnings for zero-hours contract
employees are £8 per hour,
whereas they are £13 per hour
for those not on a zero-hours
contract. Part of the gap can
be explained by compositional
effects: zero-hours contract
work tends to be concentrated
in relatively low-paid industries,
such as accommodation and food.
However, a difference exists in
every broad industry grouping.
According to the summer 2015
EO, 49% of zero-hours contract
employees earn less than £15,000
per year. Nevertheless, there are a
few zero-hours contract employees
with relatively high earnings: 9%
earn £45,000 or more.
The proportion of zero-hours
contract employees who are either
very satisfied or satisfied with their
jobs is 65%, slightly higher than
the proportion for employees as a
whole (63%). However, part-time
zero-hours contract employees
are much less likely to be satisfied
with their jobs if they want to work
more hours.
Just 60% of zero-hours contract
employees say they have a
manager or supervisor or someone
they report to as part of their job,
with a further 17% saying they
sometimes have a manager and
23% having no manager. When
zero-hours contract employees
do have a manager, they are
slightly more likely to be satisfied
with their relationship with them
than other employees. Zero-
hours contract employees are
just as positive about working
relationships with colleagues as
other employees.
Zero-hours contract employees are
more likely to see their work–life
balance in a positive light (62%
strongly agree or agree they have
the right balance) than other
employees (58%).
Whereas 41% of employees feel
under uncomfortable and excessive
pressure at work at least once or
twice a week, the proportion is
just 34% for zero-hours contract
employees. Zero-hours contract
employees with excessive workloads
are as likely as other employees in
that position to feel under pressure
– but they are much less likely to
have an excessive workload.
The (smaller) proportion of zero-
hours contract employees who
do feel under excessive pressure
at work are less likely than
other employees to say there is
support available from managers,
colleagues or anywhere else.
Zero-hours contract employees are
as satisfied with their job role and
the degree of challenge it offers
as other employees. However, they
are slightly less likely to think their
employer gives them opportunities
to learn and grow.
Less than half (43%) of zero-hours
contract employees feel fully or
fairly well informed about what is
going on at work, compared with
56% of all employees. This carries
through into less satisfaction with
the opportunities they have to
feed their views and ideas upwards
within the organisation.
Conclusions
Two-fifths of employers (39%)
think zero-hours contracts will be a
long-term feature of the UK labour
market – in other words, around
for the next four years, if not
longer. A slightly larger proportion
(43%) see them as a short- to
medium-term feature of the labour
market, with 18% unsure.
The proportion of employers
suggesting they might be a
transient form of employment
practice is surprisingly high given
how long some employers have
been using zero-hours contracts.
Although the number of people
employed on zero-hours contracts
has increased since 2013, there is
no evidence of any qualitative shift
in why they are used, how they are
used or in their impact on either
organisations or individuals.
Zero-hours contract employees are
more likely than other employees
to have hours (and earnings) that
vary from week to week – including
the possibility of spells when there
is no work and thus no income from
work. This variability will be a source
of anxiety to some, especially for
those faced with large and regular
financial commitments. It can be
seen in lower job satisfaction among
those who want to work more
hours (a characteristic shared with
other part-time employees wanting
more hours). But other zero-hours
contract employees will regard
uncertainty as an acceptable price
for the freedom to turn down work
at short notice.
7 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Zero-hours contract employees
appear more likely to have a more
distant, transactional employment
relationship than the norm – one
where work is measured (and paid)
by the hour, with less engagement
in the long-term future of the
employment relationship.
There is still room for improvement in
the operation of zero-hours contracts.
This includes greater transparency
on employment status, codifying
procedures for the cancellation of
work at short notice and termination
of a zero-hours contract. This could
be achieved in part through greater
use of model contracts, but the CIPD
also believes all workers should be
legally entitled to a written copy of
their terms and conditions not later
than after two months in employment
(currently, under the Employment
Rights Act 1996, only employees are
entitled to this).
Employers who have chosen to place
the majority of the workforce on zero-
hours contracts should provide a clear
explanation to their workforce and
other stakeholders about the reasons
that led them to take this decision.
The available evidence does not
provide a strong case for further
legislation to regulate the use of
zero-hours contracts. However, if
policy-makers do want to intervene
further to improve the rights of
zero-hours contract workers, the
CIPD has suggested introducing
a right for zero-hours contract
workers to request regular hours
after they have been in employment
with an organisation for 12 months.
An outright ban on zero-hours
contracts could do more harm than
good. Prohibiting contracts that
give employees an option to turn
work down could lead to some of
them withdrawing from the labour
force. Employers with little concern
for their employees’ well-being
could simply change contracts to
guarantee a very small minimum
number of hours or replace zero-
hours contracts with casual labour.
The best way to improve the working
lives of the zero-hours contract
workforce is to help employers
understand why they need to develop
flexible and fair working practices
and how to implement them:
• Employers should consider
whether zero-hours contracts
are appropriate for their business
and check there aren’t alternative
means of providing flexibility
for the organisation, for example
through the use of annualised
hours or other flexible working
options.
• All zero-hours contract workers
should receive a written copy of
their terms and conditions. The
written statement should clarify
the intended employment status
and employers should conduct
regular reviews to check that
the reality of the employment
relationship matches the contract
of employment.
• Employers need to provide
training and guidance for line
managers to ensure they are
managing zero-hours workers
in line with their employment
status. Training must ensure that
line managers are aware that
zero-hours workers have a legal
right to work for other employers
when there is no work available
from their primary employer.
• Employers should provide zero-
hours contract workers with
reasonable compensation if pre-
arranged work is cancelled with
little or no notice. The CIPD believes
a reasonable minimum would be
to reimburse any travel expenses
incurred and provide at least an
hour’s pay as compensation.
• Employers should ensure there
are comparable rates of pay
for people doing the same job
regardless of differences in their
employment status.
‘An outright ban
on zero-hours
contracts could do
more harm than
good. Prohibiting
contracts that
give employees
an option to
turn work down
could lead to
some of them
withdrawing from
the labour force.’
8 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 9 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
‘The most common
reasons given
by employers
for using short-
hours contracts
are to manage
fluctuations in
demand.’
Short-hours contracts
Employer perceptions
About one in ten employers use
short-hours contracts offering
one to eight hours a week of
guaranteed employment.
Employers generally use short-
hours contracts for a relatively
small proportion of the workforce,
with the mean proportion
employed being 21.9%.
A best estimate for the number of
short-hours contract employees is
400,000.
The proportion of employers using
short-hours contracts is similar in
the private and public sectors, but
lower in the voluntary sector.
Short-hours contracts are most
prevalent in hotels, accommodation
and food and in retail.
Large organisations are much more
likely than small organisations to
use short-hours contracts.
The jobs most commonly carried
out by employees on short-hours
contracts are in administrative and
support roles, cleaning, caretaking,
driving, retail and various
hospitality-related functions.
The mean number of hours typically
worked by short-hours contract
workers is 11.4 hours each week. Just
5% of employers using short-hours
contract workers say the typical
working week is 30 hours or more.
Over two-fifths (43%) of employers
using short-hours contracts choose
to emphasise their role in shaping
working time patterns, whereas
16% place the employee in the
driving seat. Almost one-third
(31%) of employers say working
patterns are broadly the same each
week, in terms of hours per day
and days per week worked.
The most common reasons given
by employers for using short-
hours contracts are to manage
fluctuations in demand (mentioned
by 45% of employers), provide
flexibility for the individual (32%)
and provide cover for absences
(32%). Reducing costs is a
specific objective for 19%. Only
11% of employers using short-
hours contracts say they are used
in order to avoid the negative
publicity surrounding zero-hours
contracts.
Employee perceptions
According to the summer 2015 EO,
the median short-hours contract
involves five to eight hours’
guaranteed work each week
and the mean number of hours
usually worked is 9.2 hours.
Only 5% of short-hours contract
employees usually work over
32 hours each week.
Almost all short-hours contract
employees (94%) consider
themselves part-time and the vast
majority of these (91%) say it is
their choice to work part-time.
However, 25% of these ‘voluntary’
part-time employees would like
to work more hours. The most
common reason given for not
working more hours is a perception
that employers are unable to offer
more hours (mentioned by 70% of
short-hours contract employees
wanting to work more hours).
The proportion of short-hours
contract employees describing
their job as temporary (rather than
permanent) is 17%.
Two-thirds (68%) of short-hours
contract employees earn less than
£15,000 per year.
The proportion of short-hours
contract employees who are either
very satisfied or satisfied with
their jobs is 67%, higher than the
proportion for employees as a
9 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
whole (63%). However, part-time
short-hours contract employees
are less likely to be satisfied with
their jobs if they want to work
more hours.
Short-hours contract employees
have a very positive view of their
managers, with 75% either very
satisfied or satisfied with their
working relationship. They are
just as positive about working
relationships with colleagues as
other employees.
Short-hours contract employees
have an especially positive view of
their work–life balance, with 72%
agreeing or strongly agreeing that
they have the right balance.
Whereas 41% of employees
feel under uncomfortable and
excessive pressure at work at
least once or twice a week, the
proportion is just 26% for short-
hours contract employees. This
is in part because short-hours
contract employees are less likely
to think their workload is excessive.
Even allowing for this, however,
short-hours contract employees
report unusually low occurrences
of excessive pressure.
Short-hours contract employees
are more satisfied with their
job role than other employees
(75% satisfied or very satisfied,
compared with 63% for all
employees).
Three-fifths (60%) of short-hours
contract employees feel fully or
fairly well informed about what
is going on at work, compared
with 56% of all employees. As a
result, half (50%) are very satisfied
or satisfied with the opportunities
available to feed their views
upwards within the organisation,
compared with 44% for all
employees.
Conclusions
On the face of it, short-hours
contracts would appear close
substitutes for zero-hours
contracts. However, the evidence
suggests there are sometimes
quite substantial differences
between the two, both in how they
are used by employers and in their
suitability to employees.
These differences mean their
experience does not provide
any reliable guide to what might
happen if a minimum hours
guarantee – or the right to request
a minimum guaranteed number
of hours – was ever introduced
for existing zero-hours contract
employees.
10 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 11 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Despite accounting for less than
5% of the UK workforce, zero-hours
contracts remain controversial.
The limited quality and coverage
of much of the available data has
probably been a factor because
it is harder to refute claims made
about zero-hours contracts from
politicians, interest groups and
commentators on all sides of the
debate if the relevant evidence is
incomplete or inconsistent.
The Labour Force Survey (LFS) has
included a question about zero-
hours contracts since 2000 (see
Figure 1).
According to these data, the
number of employees on zero-
hours contracts has almost
tripled in three years. Much of
this reported increase may be the
result of the publicity surrounding
zero-hours contracts: as they have
become more widely understood,
more people have realised they are
covered by these arrangements.
The interdependence between
individual awareness, data, media
coverage and political debate is
illustrated by trends in the number
of UK-based web searches on zero-
hours contracts (see Figure 2).
Before 2012, searches for zero-
hours contracts were, in relative
terms, miniscule or non-existent.
From early 2013 until the middle
of 2015, the weekly number of
web searches appears to be on an
upwards trend. There are two very
large spikes in the data. The first
occurs in the week when the CIPD
first released its estimate of there
being 1 million zero-hours contract
workers, which was four times
greater than the LFS estimate at
the time (CIPD 2013b). The second
occurs early in the 2015 General
Election campaign when the Labour
Party leader, Ed Miliband, made a
speech on 1 April 2015 in which he
talked about ‘exploitative’ zero-
hours contracts and promised to
Introduction
Figure 1: People in employment on a zero-hours contract, 2000–15
UK, October–December quarter except 2014 and 2015 (April–June)
Source: Oce for National Statistics, Labour Force Survey
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
Thousands
100
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 20152000
0
11 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Figure 2: Interest in zero-hours contracts, 2011–15
UK web searches for ‘zero-hours contract’ topic. Data are scaled so that 100 is the week with the highest number of searches
Source: Google Trends
100
70
80
90
60
50
40
30
20
10
2011
0
29 March–5 April 2015:
Labour Party announces
plans to introduce
guaranteed hours of work
after 12 weeks’ employment
4–11 August 2013: CIPD publishes
estimate of 1 million zero-hours
workers, four times the ONS
estimate at the time
introduce a guaranteed minimum
number of hours after 12 weeks of
continuous employment. In both
cases, the news headlines and
publicity led to many web searches.
No doubt, in some cases, the result
was individuals realising that they
(or people they know) might be
employed on a zero-hours contract.
The Office for National Statistics
(ONS) supplements the LFS with
a biannual survey of employers.
The latest data cover a period of
two weeks in the second half of
January 2015, when there were
an estimated 1.5 million contracts
where work was carried out but
where no minimum number of
hours was guaranteed. This was
an increase of 100,000 on the
previous January (ONS 2015).
1
In
addition, there were 1.9 million
contracts with no guaranteed
hours where no work was carried
out during the reference period. An
unknown proportion of these may
also be zero-hours contracts.
Improvements to data collection in
the Labour Force Survey and the
new business survey help fill some
of the gaps in the evidence base
on zero-hours contracts. However,
data on the earnings of zero-hours
employees is limited. On average,
they earn much less than other
employees, but this is probably
because most zero-hours contracts
are in relatively low-paid sectors
and for less skilled jobs, rather
than because zero-hours contract
employees are paid less than other
employees for doing the same work.
The ONS business survey provides
estimates of the prevalence of
contracts with no guaranteed
minimum number of hours but it
does not collect data on how or
why employers use them.
Similarly, the LFS does not collect
data from employees on their
experience of zero-hours contracts
or on some important outcomes,
including well-being.
Many of these issues were covered
in the previous CIPD report
Zero-hours Contracts: Myth and
reality (CIPD 2013b). This report
updates and extends that analysis.
In particular, it includes data on
short-hours contract working,
which has to date received far less
attention in debates about the
quality and desirability of these
forms of work. This may in part be
due to the lack of official statistics.
The available evidence suggests
that short-hours contracts are
commonplace in retail: a survey
of union members in the sector
found that 10% were employed on
contracts that offer between one
and ten hours of guaranteed work
each week (USDAW 2014). As with
zero-hours contracts, there is no
universally accepted definition of
a short-hours contract. This report
uses a guaranteed minimum of
eight hours a week as the upper
limit for a short-hours contract.
The definitions used in this report
are explained in the glossary.
2012 2013 2014 2015
12 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 13 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Methodology
This report is based upon
analysis of survey data from both
employers and employees.
The employer perspective is
provided by the CIPD’s quarterly
Labour Market Outlook (LMO), a
representative sample survey of all
employers in the UK with two or
more employees.
Questions on zero-hours and
short-hours contracts were
included in the surveys conducted
in the spring and summer of 2015,
which generated responses from
1,013 employers and 931 employers
respectively (see CIPD 2015a and
CIPD 2015b for summaries of the
survey data and further information
about the composition of the
samples). The LMO data quoted
in this report are weighted to be
representative of the structure of
UK employment. In other words, a
finding that ‘x% of employers say
they use zero-hours contracts’ means
that zero-hours contracts are used
by employers who, between them,
employ x% of the UK workforce
with two or more employees.
2
Data were collected from some
additional employers who use
short-hours contracts. These
have been added to those surveyed
in the main spring and summer
surveys, producing a combined
dataset of 453 employers who use
either short-hours contracts or
zero-hours contracts (see Table 1).
3
Of these employers, 157 used short-
hours contracts, 209 used zero-
hours contracts and 88 used both
types of contract.
Analyses of the combined dataset
quoted in this report are weighted
by sector and employer size to be
representative of all employers
using short-hours or zero-hours
contracts during the spring and
summer of 2015.
The LFS collects data on
employees with zero-hours
contracts and this has been
supplemented by data from
the CIPD’s quarterly Employee
Outlook survey. This is a survey
of employees (including sole
traders) with participants drawn
from members of the YouGov Plc
UK panel of more than 350,000
individuals who have agreed to
take part in surveys.
Relevant questions were included
in the unpublished summer 2015
survey which allow comparisons
to be made between zero-
hours contract, short-hours
contract, temporary and part-
time employees. In total, 2,572
employees responded to the
survey. Fieldwork was undertaken
between 12 June and 7 September
2015. The figures presented in this
report have been weighted to be
representative of the UK workforce
in relation to sector (private,
public and voluntary), employer
size band, industry and full-time/
part-time working by gender. The
sample also includes boosts of
employees on zero-hours contracts
(to achieve a minimum of 300
responses), employees contracted
to work 1-8 hours (to achieve a
minimum of 100 responses) and
employees contracted to work 1-8
hours but who in practice work
more hours (to achieve a minimum
of 50 responses).
Table 1: Composition of combined dataset
Number of responses (unweighted)
Does your
organisation employ
people under a zero-
hours contract?
Does your organisation employ people under a short-hours contract?
Yes (up to 8 hours’
guaranteed work)
No (more than 8 hours’
guaranteed work) Impossible to say Row total
Yes 88 75 46 209
No 67 134 35 236
Don’t know 2 1 5 8
Column total 157 210 86 453
Source: CIPD combined Labour Market Outlook dataset, spring/summer 2015.
13 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Table 2: Employers using zero-hours and short-hours contracts (% of employers)
Yes (up to 8 hours’
guaranteed work)
No (more than 8 hours’
guaranteed work)
Employers using zero-hours contracts 23 26
Employers using short-hours contracts 6 8
Employers using zero-hours and short-hours contracts 2 4
Employers using neither zero-hours nor short-hours contracts 72 67
Source: CIPD Labour Market Outlook surveys
Use of zero-hours and short-hours
contracts
According to the LMO surveys
conducted in spring and summer
2015, about a quarter of employers
use zero-hours contracts, little
changed from the 2013 estimate
of 23%. About one in ten
employers use short-hours
contracts offering one to eight
hours a week of guaranteed
employment (see Table 2).
Only a small proportion of
employers use both types of
contract, although not necessarily
for the same types of work. Most
employers using these contracts
use one but not the other (84%
of employers using either type of
contract in summer 2015).
Employers generally use zero-
hours and short-hours contracts
for a relatively small proportion of
the workforce (see Figure 3). In
both cases, over half of employers
use them for less than 20% of the
workforce, presumably restricted
to specific roles or as a variable
margin to cover peaks and troughs
in workload. But there are a small
number of employers who have
chosen to make these contracts
their standard employment
model: 10% of zero-hours contract
employers and 8% of short-hours
contract employers use them for
over half of the workforce.
Employer perspectives
Figure 3: Proportion of an organisation’s workforce employed on zero-hours and short-hours contracts (%)
1–10
1–10
11–20
11–20
21–30
21–30
31–40
31–40
41–50
41–50
51–60
51–60
61–70
61–70
71–80
71–80
81–90
81–90
91–100
91–100
Base: Employers who used zero-hours contracts/short-hours contracts and were able to estimate the proportion of the workforce on them (n=330 and n=106)
Source: CIPD combined Labour Market Outlook dataset, spring/summer 2015
Zero-hours contracts
Mean = 19.7
Short-hours contracts
Mean = 21.9
42
35
10
17
5
8
2
1
3
7
2
3
2 2
3
1
1
0
2 2
14 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 15 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
In spring 2015, the mean
proportion of the workforce
employed on zero-hours contracts
in the private sector organisations
using them was 27%, whereas it
was 11% in the public and voluntary
sectors – again, similar proportions
to 2013. Almost all organisations
with more than half of the
workforce on zero-hours contracts
are in the private sector.
A best estimate for the number
of zero-hours contract employees
at spring/summer 2015 is
1.3 million, which is an increase
from the 2013 estimate of 1 million.
A best estimate for the number
of short-hours contract employees
is 400,000 (see box for details of
these calculations).
Decisions on whether or not to use
these types of contract can change.
In spring 2015, 6% of employers
who didn’t use zero-hours
contracts at that time had used
them in the past. At the same time,
1% of employers who had never
used zero-hours contracts planned
to introduce them shortly and 2%
were considering their introduction.
Another 12% had no plans but
might consider their use in the
medium term. Nevertheless, over
three-quarters (78%) of employers
who have never used zero-hours
contracts don’t think they will ever
use them. Half the employers in
this group don’t think they need
that level of flexibility. There are
also concerns about a negative
impact on employee engagement
(mentioned by 44% of employers
who will never introduce zero-
hours contracts), their exploitative
nature (33%) and the negative
publicity that zero-hours contracts
have generated (16%).
This suggests there may be
limited scope for further increases
in the proportion of employers
using zero-hours contracts. This
doesn’t necessarily mean the
number of people employed on
these contracts is at or near a
peak. Growth could still arise if
organisations already using zero-
hours contracts make greater use
of them.
Calculation of estimates of numbers of zero-hours and short-hours contract employees
Numbers of zero-hours and short-hours contract employees are estimated using the following calculation:
[Number of employees] x [% of employers using zero-hours/short-hours contracts] x [% of workforce on
zero-hours/short-hours contracts]
Where:
The number of employees in businesses with two or more employees is 27.666 million, taken from the whole
economy table of the 2015 UK business population estimates.
The proportions of employers using zero-hours contracts/short-hours contracts are 24.6% and 6.9%
(arithmetic means of employment-weighted percentages from the spring and summer 2015 LMO surveys,
see Table 2).
The proportions of the workforce on zero-hours/short-hours contracts where these are used are 19.7% and
21.9% (employment-weighted percentages taken from the combined LMO dataset, see Figure 3).
Multiplying these together gives estimates of 1.34 million for zero-hours contracts and 415,000 for short-
hours contracts. Disaggregating the calculation using six employee size bands produces slightly different
estimates (1.25 million and 400,000), so both estimates have been rounded to the nearest 100,000 to avoid
appearing unduly precise.
Note that rounding does not correct for all the sources of uncertainty in these calculations. Other potential
sources of variation include item non-response (in particular, 30% of employers using zero-hours contracts
and 40% of employers using short-hours contracts don’t know what proportion of their workforce
are employed on these contracts), non-response bias in general, and imperfect understanding among
employers of these contracts (even though definitions were provided).
15 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Variation across employers in the
use of zero-hours and short-hours
contracts
In line with previous CIPD research,
employers in the public and
voluntary sectors are more likely
to use zero-hours contracts than
private sector employers (see
Figure 4). This is not the case with
short-hours contracts, where the
proportion using them is very similar
in the private and public sectors, but
lower in the voluntary sector.
These differences by sector
arise because of significant
differences between industries in
the use of both types of contract
(see Figure 5). Zero-hours contracts
are most often used by employers
in hotels, accommodation and
food, health and social work (which
includes social care), education and
the voluntary sector.
4
Short-hours
contracts are most prevalent in
hotels, accommodation and food
and in retail.
Large organisations are much
more likely than small
organisations to use zero-hours
contracts and short-hours
contracts (see Figure 6).
Figure 4: Employer use of zero-hours and short-hours contracts, by sector (%)
Private sector Public sector Voluntary sector
Source: CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey, summer 2015.
3
31
8
32
9
24
Short-hours contracts
Zero-hours contracts
Figure 5: Employer use of zero-hours and short-hour contracts, by industry (%)
Source: CIPD combined Labour Market Outlook survey, summer 2015
29
9
35
46
31
61
11
19
20
19
12
3
10
3
3
27
18
6
2
5
Agriculture, construction etc.
Manufacturing
Education
Health and social work
Voluntary
Hotels, catering, accommodation
Retail
Transportation, communication
Finance, business services
Central and local government
Short-hours contracts
Zero-hours contracts
16 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 17 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
How employers use zero-hours
and short-hours contracts
The majority of organisations that
use zero-hours and short-hours
contract workers employ them
directly, rather than through an
employment agency, although a
small minority use both direct and
indirect employment models (see
Table 3).
Employers use zero-hours and
short-hours contract workers for a
variety of jobs (see Figure 7). The
jobs most commonly mentioned by
employers are administrative and
support roles, care work, cleaning
and various hospitality-related
functions. Some more skilled
jobs (nursing, IT, teaching) are
also mentioned. The distribution
of roles for short-hours contract
workers is similar. The main
differences are that employers
using short-hours contracts are
more likely to highlight driver,
caretaker and retail roles and
less likely to be using them for
administrative and support staff,
cleaners and nurses.
Figure 6: Employer use of zero-hours and short-hours contracts, by employee size band (%)
Source: CIPD combined Labour Market Outlook survey, summer 2015
6
5
10
4
10
1
19
7
33
11
22
15
Micro
(2–9 employees)
Small
(10–49 employees)
Medium
(50–249 employees)
250–999
employees
1,000–9,999
employees
10,000+
employees
Short-hours contracts
Zero-hours contracts
Table 3: Arrangements for the employment of zero-hours and short-hours contract workers (%)
Employers using
zero-hours contracts
(n=215)
Employers using
short-hours contracts
(n=104)
Direct employment 78 75
Employment via an agency 6 15
Both 15 7
Sources: CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey, spring 2015 (zero-hours contracts); combined CIPD Labour Market Outlook dataset,
spring/summer 2015 (short-hours contracts)
17 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Employers generally use zero-
hours and short-hours contracts
for a limited number of specific
jobs rather than for a wide range
of different ones. The list of jobs
shown in Figure 7 has 27 different
categories, but 83% of employers
using zero-hours contracts and
86% of employers using short-
hours contracts use them in no
more than three different roles.
Employers were asked, ‘On
average, how many hours per
week does a member of staff
employed under a zero-hours
contract/short-hours contract
work at your organisation?’ Over
two-fifths of employers using
zero-hours contracts and a third
of employers using short-hours
contracts were unable to provide
an answer. Where an average or
Figure 7: Roles filled by zero-hours and short-hours contract workers
Administrative roles
Cleaners
Caterers/waiters or waitresses
Care/social workers
Secretaries, PAs etc.
Support staff
Other
Nurses
Caretaker/cleaner
Retail workers
Chefs or cooks
Teachers/tutors
Call centre/customer services
Salesforce
IT staff
Production/machine operators
Labourers
Doctors
Consultants
Other hotel, catering or leisure
Drivers
Skilled trades workers
Security staff
Researchers
Legal staff
HR staff
Media staff
Source: CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey, spring 2015 (zero-hours contracts, n=215);
combined CIPD Labour Market Outlook dataset, spring/summer 2015 (short-hours contracts, n=157)
5 10 15 20 25 30
0
Short-hours contracts
Zero-hours contracts
% of employers
18 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 19 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
typical number of hours could
be provided, zero-hours contract
workers usually work considerably
longer hours than short-hours
contract workers (see Figure 8).
The mean number of hours
typically worked by zero-
hours contract workers is 19.4,
compared with 11.4 for short-hours
contract workers. Whereas 20%
of employers with zero-hours
contract workers typically employ
them for 30 or more hours each
week – which, for statistical
purposes, would count as full-time
employment – this is the case for
just 5% of employers using short-
hours contract workers.
Employers were also asked about
the qualitative nature of their
working time arrangements:
‘Which description best describes
the typical working hours pattern
of a member of staff that is
employed under a zero-hours
contract/short-hours contract at
your organisation?’ Over two-fifths
of employers using both types
of contract choose to emphasise
their role in driving working time
patterns (see Table 4). One in
six place the employee in the
driving seat. About two-fifths of
employers using each type of
contract focus on the variability
of working time. Here, there is a
noticeable difference between the
two contracts. Employers using
zero-hours contracts are more
likely to emphasise variability and
the impossibility of being able to
describe a typical working pattern.
Employers using short-hours
contracts are more likely to stress
a degree of regularity in the hours
and days worked each week.
5
‘The mean number
of hours typically
worked by zero-
hours contract
workers is 19.4,
compared with
11.4 for short-
hours contract
workers.’
Short-hours contracts
Zero-hours contracts
Figure 8: Distribution of typical weekly hours for zero-hours and short-hours contract workers (%)
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Up to 5
hours
6–10
hours
11–15
hours
16–20
hours
21–25
hours
26–30
hours
31–35
hours
36–40
hours
41–45
hours
46–50
hours
51–55
hours
56–60
hours
60+
hours
Source: CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey, spring 2015 (zero-hours contracts, n=210);
combined CIPD Labour Market Outlook dataset, spring/summer 2015 (short-hours contracts, n=71)
19 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Why employers use zero-hours
and short-hours contracts
The employment and management
practices used by an organisation
depend, among other factors, on
its strategic orientation, market
positioning, how it competes
and its internal culture (see CIPD
2014b, Wu et al 2014, Wood et al
2013, Winterbotham et al 2014).
Data collected in the summer 2015
LMO captured various aspects
of organisation strategy and
mindset.
6
In general, these factors
seem to account for little of the
variation across employers in the
use of zero-hours and short-hours
contracts (see Table 5).
Table 4: Typical working hours patterns of zero-hours and short-hours contract workers (%)
Employers using
zero-hours contracts
(n=215)
Employers using
short-hours contracts
(n=104)
Working hours are driven largely by the employer 44 43
Working hours are driven by the individual 15 16
Hours are broadly the same each week 14 21
Hours vary greatly each week 10 3
Working days are broadly the same each week 3 10
Working days vary greatly each week 3 1
It is impossible to tell 9 4
Don’t know 2 2
Sources: CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey, spring 2015 (zero-hours contracts); combined CIPD Labour Market Outlook dataset,
spring/summer 2015 (short-hours contracts)
Table 5: Use of zero-hours and short-hours contracts, by product/service strategy, organisation
culture and mindset (%)
Employers using
zero-hours contracts
Employers using
short-hours contracts
Product/service strategy
Premium quality (n=560) 27 5
Basic/standard quality (n=295) 27 14
Organisation culture
Family (n=354) 24 7
Structured (n=306) 31 8
Entrepreneurial (n=109) 20 5
Results-oriented (n=160) 23 12
Organisation mindset
Survivor (n=200) 26 8
Cost-cutter (n=131) 12 11
Balanced investor (n=165) 28 7
People-focused investor (n=110) 28 10
Capital-focused investor (n=128) 30 5
Source: CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey, summer 2015
20 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 21 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
The summer 2015 LMO also asked
respondents to identify current
priorities for their organisation
(see Figure 9). Again, employers
using zero-hours and short-
hours contracts tend not to differ
much from other employers.
However, employers using zero-
hours contracts are more likely
to give priority to increasing
organisational responsiveness to
change, regulatory compliance and
improving reputation and brand.
It is not possible to determine
whether the use of zero-hours
and short-hours contracts is
determined by business priorities
or whether business priorities
might be influenced by the use of
zero-hours contracts and short-
hours contracts. Using zero-hours
contracts is an understandable
strategy for organisations seeking
to improve their ability to deploy
labour flexibly and quickly.
However, the negative publicity
attached to zero-hours contracts
could also be the reason why
employers using them are more
likely to be concerned about
reputation and brand (and,
perhaps, regulatory compliance).
The use of zero-hours and short-
hours contracts sometimes forms
part of a broader approach to
the flexible deployment of labour.
Both zero-hours and short-hours
contracts are more common in
organisations where 11% or more
of the workforce are temporary
contract workers (see Table 6).
Table 6: Use of zero-hours and short-hours contracts, by presence of temporary contract workers (%)
% of workforce made up of workers on
temporary contracts
Employers using
zero-hours contracts
Employers using
short-hours contracts
0% (n=339) 9 3
1–10% (n=318) 26 6
11–25% (n=122) 45 16
26%+ (n=147) 42 15
Source: CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey, summer 2015
Figure 9: Current priorities for the organisation (%)
Cost management
Growth of market share in new or existing markets
Customer service improvement
Improving productivity
Improving organisational responsiveness to change
Regulatory compliance
Product innovation and quality improvement
Increasing sustainability
Improving corporate responsibility, reputation and brand
Significant refocus of business direction
% of employers identifying these areas as a current priority
Source: CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey, spring 2015 (n=929)
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
Employers using zero-hours contracts
Employers using short-hours contracts
All employers
21 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Employers who used zero-hours
and short-hours contracts were
asked a specific question about
their reasons for using them (see
Figure 10). The most common
reasons given for using both
types of contract are to manage
fluctuations in demand, provide
flexibility for the individual and
provide cover for absences, both
expected (such as holidays) and
unexpected (such as sickness
absence). Reducing costs is a
specific objective for about one-
fifth of employers using both types
of contract and some employers
also mention the costs associated
with employment of agency
workers (both fees and meeting
regulatory requirements). Only
11% of employers using short-
hours contracts say they use them
in order to avoid the negative
publicity surrounding zero-hours
contracts.
Almost half (47%) of employers
using zero-hours contracts see
them as a long-term feature of
their workforce strategy, likely
to still be in use in four or more
years’ time. In contrast, just 13%
of employers using zero-hours
contracts see them as a short-term
element in their plans, unlikely to
be used in 12 months’ time, with
29% thinking they might have a
lifespan of two to three years –
very similar responses to those
provided by employers in 2013.
Employers in the public sector
and employers with more than
10% of the workforce on zero-
hours contracts are more likely to
consider them part of their long-
term workforce strategy.
The priorities, mindset, market
positioning and internal culture of
an organisation are not, in general,
significant influences on whether
or not it uses zero-hours or short-
hours contracts. Nor indeed
are industry or sector, although
organisation size does increase
the likelihood of using these
contracts. The main influences on
whether or not these contracts
are used appear to be the nature
of the work, the variability and
predictability of customer demand
and staffing requirements, and
the extent to which they are part
of a broader workforce flexibility
agenda. Employee preferences
also play a role, as does a desire to
manage costs.
7
The practical operation of zero-
hours contracts
One strand of the debate
around zero-hours contracts has
centred on their advantages and
disadvantages and on whether
or not it would be desirable (or
feasible) to restrict or prohibit their
use. A second strand has focused
on specific issues associated with
how zero-hours contracts are used
in the workplace and whether
there is a case for regulations
governing how they are used.
One example is exclusivity
clauses, which the Government
has prohibited. Other issues
that have featured in the debate
include employment status, the
Figure 10: Reasons why employers use zero-hours and short-hours contracts (%)
Manage fluctuations in demand
Provide flexibility for individual
Provide coverage for staff absences
Part of a broader strategy to keep costs down
Uncertain business conditions
To avoid agency fees
To retain workers rather than make them redundant
Avoid Agency Workers Regulations costs
Other
Legacy within the organisation
Don’t know
No particular reason
To avoid negative publicity of zero-hours contracts
Respondents could select more than one reason
Source: CIPD Labour Market Outlook surveys, spring 2015 (zero-hours contracts, n=215);
combined CIPD Labour Market Outlook dataset, spring/summer 2015 (short-hours contracts, n=104)
Zero-hours contracts
Short-hours contracts
45
66
32
51
32
46
19
21
23
18
11
14
17
13
6
10
6
8
14
6
1
2
2
1
11
22 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 23 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
information provided to employees
(including notice of when work is
not available or when a zero-hours
contract is terminated) and their
treatment in terms of pay and
other benefits. Data covering these
topics were collected in the spring
2015 LMO.
Employers using zero-hours
contracts were asked: ‘In practice,
how does your organisation
generally classify the employment
status of staff who are on a zero-
hours contract?’ The picture is
similar to 2013: most employers
of zero-hours contract staff (67%)
classify them as employees, with
19% classifying them as workers, 5%
as self-employed, 6% not classifying
their status and 1% unaware.
8
A large majority of employers using
zero-hours contracts (81%) provide
them with a written contract, 8%
do not provide a contract and
8% say it varies, with 3% unsure
because workers are supplied by
a recruitment agency. Where a
written contract is provided, 86%
of these employers say it records
employment status. Of course,
whatever is stated in a contract
may not match employment status
in law. This ultimately would be
determined by a tribunal on the
basis of all the relevant evidence,
including (but not restricted
to) the contents of the written
contract of employment.
Employers were asked whether
employees on zero-hours
contracts are under a contractual
obligation to accept work if it
is offered to them. They were
also asked: ‘Regardless of what
the contract says, are staff on
zero-hours contracts within your
organisation expected to accept
work in practice?’ More than half of
employers (58%) give employees
the freedom in contract to turn
work down and say they
also honour this in practice (see
Table 7). However, a fifth of
employers (21%) say that contracts
give workers the right to turn work
down when, in practice, they are
always or sometimes expected to
accept all work offered to them.
This would appear to violate the
spirit, and possibly the letter, of
the employment contract.
Employers were also asked
whether they have a contractual
provision, practice or policy on the
amount of notice given to staff on
zero-hours contracts when a shift
is cancelled or when the company’s
relationship with the individual
is terminated (see Table 8). Two-
thirds (66%) of employers say
they have some form of policy or
practice on notice of termination,
compared with 55% in 2013. Less
than half of employers (45%) say
they have policies or practices
when it comes to cancelling a
shift. There is some uncertainty
here among employers, with 20%
unsure what the position is in at
least one of these situations.
Table 7: Contractual and practical obligations on zero-hours contract workers to accept all work oered
% of employers using zero-hours contracts, excluding ‘don’t know’ responses (n=205)
Contractual obligation Regardless of contract, whether practical obligation exists
Yes – obliged
to accept
No – free to
turn down Sometimes Row totals
Yes – obliged to accept 13 1 0 14
No – free to turn down 11 58 10 79
Sometimes 2 <0.5 6 8
Column totals 25 59 15
Source: CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey, spring 2015.
Table 8: Existence of contractual provision, practice or policy on amount of notice given to zero-hours contract workers
% of employers using zero-hours contracts (n=215)
Notification of
cancellation of shift
Notification of termination
Yes No Don’t know Row totals
Yes 41 2 2 45
No 21 17 1 38
Don’t know 4 1 12 17
Column totals 66 20 15
Source: CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey, spring 2015.
23 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Employers were asked to provide
additional information on their
policies or procedures, if they had
them. The number of answers
in each case was too small for
statistical analysis but some
common themes emerged. When
it came to cancellation of a shift,
some employers emphasise this
rarely or never happens, at least
once a rota has been drawn up.
The most commonly mentioned
notice periods are 24 or 48 hours
before a shift commences. Some
employers specifically say they
will pay the employee if the shift
is cancelled at shorter notice. A
number of employers do not allow
employees to cancel shifts once
they have accepted them, whereas
others also have minimum notice
periods for employees who want
to cancel work at short notice. As
for termination of the employment
relationship, some employers say
they treat zero-hours contract
employees in the same way as
other employees when it comes to
procedures and calculating notice
periods. Otherwise, commonly
specified notice periods are one
week and one month.
The majority of employers using
zero-hours contracts (63%) pay
zero-hours contract staff about
the same hourly rate as those on a
permanent contract doing the same
job. Some employers (16%) pay a
higher rate and others (9%) pay a
lower rate. A small proportion (4%)
don’t know the relative pay rate and
for 9% the question doesn’t apply,
presumably because there are no
situations where people with zero-
hours contracts and permanent
contracts are doing the same job.
As the proportion of the workforce
on zero-hours contracts increases,
it becomes less and less likely that
people on zero-hours contracts and
permanent contracts are doing the
same job.
Over four-fifths (82%) of
employers using zero-hours
contract workers say they are
eligible for company training and
development, with just 13% saying
this is not the case.
Entitlements of zero-hours contract
staff to a range of benefits
and rights – many specified in
employment legislation – depend
to a large extent on whether or not
their employer is one of the 67%
that classifies them as employees
(see Figure 11).
Source: CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey, spring 2015 (n=215)
Employers who do not treat zero-hours contract workers as employees
All employers of zero-hours contract workers
Employers who treat zero-hours contract workers as employees
Figure 11: Benefits available to people on zero-hours contracts (%)
Right to receive written statement of terms and conditions
Annual paid leave
Statutory minimum notice
Right not to be unfairly dismissed (after 2 years’ service)
Pension auto-enrolment
Statutory sick pay
Statutory maternity, paternity, adoption leave and pay
Statutory redundancy pay (after 2 years’ service)
Right to request flexible working
Occupational sick pay
None – no benefits are available
69
61
45
71
59
35
69
57
33
65
51
23
56
48
31
61
48
22
53
43
24
48
36
14
44
33
11
21
26
10
5
14
31
24 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 25 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Employers are most likely to say
people on zero-hours contracts are
entitled to annual paid leave (61%),
the right to receive a statement of
written terms and conditions (59%)
and the statutory minimum notice
period (57%). Employers are least
likely to give them entitlement to
occupational sick pay (21%), which
is discretionary.
Reported entitlements have
changed little since 2013, but there
has been a noticeable increase
in the proportion of employers
saying zero-hours contract workers
are entitled to pension auto-
enrolment, up from 38% in 2013
to 48% in 2015. During this period,
the coverage of auto-enrolment
across businesses has expanded
significantly.
9
It is difficult to judge the degree
of compliance with relevant
employment law from these
data. Entitlement depends on
employment status: none of these
entitlements are available to the
self-employed and all but paid
annual leave are not available
to workers. As noted above,
employment status in law depends
on a wider range of factors than
whether the employer decides
to treat people as employees
or as workers. In addition, there
are sometimes restrictions on
entitlement that were not included
in the question put to employers
(for example, minimum earnings
thresholds for statutory maternity,
paternity, adoption leave and
pay and a requirement for 26
weeks’ continuous service before
being able to exercise the right to
request flexible working).
Exclusivity clauses
The CIPD supports the prohibition
of exclusivity clauses for zero-
hours contract workers. However,
its response to the Government’s
public consultation noted that
exclusivity clauses aren’t used
solely for zero-hours contract
workers. Employers might
have valid business reasons for
prohibiting employees from
working for other employers,
or requiring them to obtain
permission before doing so, such
as protecting intellectual property
or preventing their employees from
working for competitors (CIPD
2014a).
The spring 2015 LMO included a
question designed to capture the
extent to which employers placed
restriction on those working for
them: ‘On balance, which, if any,
workers are at least occasionally
prohibited from working for
another company?’ Nearly half
(45%) of employers have no
restrictions preventing employees
from working for another company.
Restrictions typically apply to full-
time or permanent employees only
(see Table 9).
Employers in the voluntary
sector and in small organisations
Table 9: Restrictions on working for another company (% of employers)
No employees
prevented from
working for
another company
Full-time
employees
only
Permanent
employees
only
All zero-hours
contract
workers
Too difficult
to say/don’t
know
Private sector (n=653) 44 29 18 2 14
Public sector (n=249) 45 17 13 1 26
Voluntary sector (n=110) 60 9 11 0 20
Micro (2–9 employees) (n=161) 64 22 14 0 7
Small (10–49 employees) (n=177) 51 32 16 0 10
Medium (50–249 employees) (n=233) 43 25 19 <0.5 16
250–999 employees (n=114) 43 21 15 3 16
1,000–9,999 employees (n=192) 40 22 16 3 21
10,000+ employees (n=135) 37 29 20 2 23
Employer uses zero-hours contracts (n=215) 49 17 13 6 13
Employer doesn’t use zero-hours contracts (n=783) 44 27 18 n/a 17
All employers (n=1,012) 45 25 17 1 17
Row totals do not add to 100% because respondents could select more than one category and the table does not report additional
categories where the number of responses was very small (‘All employees but zero-hours contract workers’ and ‘Other’).
Source: CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey, spring 2015
25 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
are most likely to say that no
employees are prevented from
working for another company.
Larger organisations are typically
more bureaucratic and more likely
to have specialist HR capability,
which makes them more likely
to envisage (and experience)
potential conflicts and devise
policies for dealing with them. But
size also means it is more difficult
for any survey respondent to know
about practice on the ground,
hence part of the difference is due
to smaller organisations being less
likely to choose the ‘too difficult to
say’ or ‘don’t know’ categories.
Only 6% of employers using
zero-hours contract workers even
occasionally prohibit them from
working for another company. This
suggests that the prohibition of
exclusivity clauses is unlikely to
affect many employers because
few still had restrictions in place for
zero-hours contract workers when
the legislation came into force.
26 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 27 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
This section reports the
characteristics, attitudes and
preferences of employees on zero-
hours and short-hours contracts, in
many cases providing comparisons
with other employees.
All the data presented are based
on surveys where the classification
of employees is based on their
responses to questions about
guaranteed number of hours.
Hence the accuracy of the results
depends on how well informed
employees are about the terms
regulating their employment. The
publicity surrounding zero-hours
contracts undoubtedly means that
more employees are aware of their
existence than, say, five years ago.
And this probably means more
employees with no guaranteed
hours (or small numbers of
guaranteed hours) are aware
of their position. Nevertheless,
there invariably will be some
measurement error in the data.
The latest LFS data for April–June
2015 provide detailed information
on the characteristics of zero-hours
contract workers together with
information about their pay, hours
and permanent/temporary status.
The summer 2015 EO provides
additional data on employees with
zero-hours contracts as well as data
on short-hours contract employees
(defined here as those with up to
eight hours a week of guaranteed
work).
10
Characteristics of zero-hours
contract employees
According to the LFS, of the estimated
744,000 zero-hours contract
employees in April–June 2015, 46%
are men and 54% are women.
Exactly one-quarter of zero-hours
contract employees are students
still in full-time education. This
helps to explain why a third of
zero-hours contract employees are
aged under 25, as the majority of
these are students (see Figure 12).
One-fifth of zero-hours contract
employees are aged 25–34, another
fifth are aged 35–49, and just under
a quarter are aged 50 or over.
Looking at zero-hours contract
employees who have left full-
time education, 57% of them have
GCSE A Level or higher education
qualifications, a proportion that
varies relatively little by age group.
11
Hours worked and employment
status
According to the LFS, the mean
number of hours actually worked
by zero-hours contract employees
Employee perspectives
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
16–24 16–24 16–2425–34 25–34 25–3435–49 35–49 35–4950–64 50–64 50–6465+ 65+ 65+
Figure 12: Zero-hours contract workers by age, educational status and highest educational qualification
Source: Oce for National Statistics, Labour Force Survey, April–June 2015
GCSE A–C/equivalent
GCSE A Level/equivalent
Other/no qualification
HE qualification/degree
All zero-hours
contract
workers
In full-time
education
Left full-time
education
27 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
in April–June 2015 is 22.2, which
is considerably shorter than
the average for all those in
employment (32.3 hours). The
mean hours usually worked by
zero-hours contract employees is
25.1 hours. Variability is a defining
feature of zero-hours contracts,
so it is not surprising that the
proportion of zero-hours contract
employees whose actual hours
worked in the survey reference
period matched their usual hours
(41%) is lower than that for all in
employment (56%).
12
The LFS shows that the majority
(59%) of zero-hours contract
employees do not want to work
more hours, compared with
88% of all those in employment.
A quarter (24%) of zero-hours
contract employees would like
to work additional hours in their
current job, with 12% wanting a
replacement job with longer hours
and 5% wanting an additional job
(presumably while keeping their
current job with its current hours).
The mean number of hours usually
worked by zero-hours contract
employees in the summer 2015 EO
is 23.9, which is almost identical
to the 2013 estimate of 23.7 hours.
Just over half (52%) of zero-hours
contract employees usually work
for less than 25 hours a week,
although one-seventh (14%) work
for longer than 40 hours each
week (see Figure 13).
Short-hours contract employees
typically work far fewer hours each
week than zero-hours contract
employees and the distribution of
hours worked is more compact.
The median short-hours contract
involves five to eight hours’ work
each week and the mean number
of hours usually worked is 9.2
hours. Only 5% of short-hours
contract employees usually work
over 32 hours each week, which
corresponds roughly with full-time
hours.
A comparison of Figure 13 with
Figure 8 suggests the distributions
of usual hours worked each week
reported by employers of those
on zero-hours and short-hours
contracts are quite similar to the
distributions of hours worked
reported by employees on these
contracts.
Almost three-fifths (59%) of
zero-hours contract employees
in the summer 2015 EO describe
themselves as working part-time,
a similar proportion to that found
in the LFS (64%) (see Figure 14).
Given their shorter working hours, it
is not surprising that 94% of short-
Figure 13: Distribution of usual hours worked by zero-hours and short-hours contract employees (%)
Short-hours contracts
Zero-hours contracts
60
50
40
30
20
10
1–4
hours
5–8
hours
9–16
hours
17–24
hours
25–32
hours
33–40
hours
41–48
hours
49–56
hours
56+
hours
0
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, spring 2015 (zero-hours contract employees, n=355;
short-hours contract employees, n=161)
28 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 29 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
hours contract employees consider
themselves part-time. The vast
majority of part-time employees say
it is their choice to work part-time;
this also applies to those zero-hours
and short-hours contract employees
who describe themselves as
part-time. Almost all of the small
minority of ‘involuntary’ part-time
employees want to work more
hours, regardless of whether or not
they have a zero-hours or short-
hours contract. In addition, 18% of
‘voluntary’ part-time employees
want to work more hours. This
proportion, however, rises to 22%
for ‘voluntary’ part-time employees
on zero-hours contracts and 25%
for similar employees on short-
hours contracts.
13
Part-time employees who want
more hours were asked if they had
asked their employer for more
hours within the last 12 months.
Three-fifths (60%) have done so,
with the proportion slightly higher
for zero-hours contract employees
(64%) and slightly lower for short-
hours contract employees (55%),
although the differences are not
statistically significant.
The most common factor
preventing part-time employees
from working more hours is a
perception that their employer
doesn’t or cannot currently offer
more hours, mentioned by 70% of
part-time employees and short-
hours contract employees and
by 81% of zero-hours contract
employees. Part-time employees
who have asked for more hours are
more likely to say this is a barrier
(mentioned by 81%) than those
who haven’t asked for more hours
(mentioned by 53% of this group).
Fear of adverse treatment from
management does not appear to
be a factor holding (part-time)
employees back from asking for
more hours: just 3% of part-time
employees are reluctant or reticent
to ask for more hours.
According to the April–June 2015
LFS, 258,000 zero-hours contract
employees describe their job as
not being permanent in some way,
which is 35% of all zero-hours
contract employees. Only a small
fraction of these, 33,000, are
agency workers.
The proportion of zero-hours
contract employees surveyed in
the summer 2015 EO describing
their job as temporary (rather
than permanent) is 37%, which is
very similar to the LFS (see Figure
15). The proportion of short-hours
contract employees in temporary
work, at 17%, is lower. Like other
temporary employees, just over
half of temporary zero-hours
contract employees say this is
their choice (although a few of
these would prefer a permanent
contract). The vast majority of
those who say their temporary
status is not a matter of choice
would prefer a permanent
contract.
Wants more
hours: 22%
Wants more
hours: 92%
Numbers too small
to analyse further
Figure 14: Preferences for part-time work and for additional hours
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, summer 2015
Wants more
hours: 25%
Wants more
hours: 18%
Wants more
hours: 95%
Full-time: 41%
Part-time: 59%
Full-time: 6%
Part-time: 94%
Full-time: 72%
Part-time: 28%
Voluntary: 88%
Involuntary: 12%
Voluntary: 91%
Involuntary: 9%
Voluntary: 89%
Involuntary: 11%
Zero-hours
contract
employees
(n=368)
Short-hours
contract
employees
(n=168)
All employees
(n=2,572)
29 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
While discussions of zero-hours
contracts often focus on their
relative novelty and precarious
nature – with the constant threat
of being ‘zero-ed down’ as a
cheap way of terminating the
employment relationship – almost
one-fifth of zero-hours contract
employees have been with their
current employer for over five
years (see Figure 16). This may
include some employees originally
hired on different terms whose
employment contracts have since
been amended to place them on a
zero-hours basis.
Figure 16: Length of time with current employer for employees on zero-hours contracts (%)
Source: Oce for National Statistics, Labour Force Survey, April–June 2015
Less than 1 year
9
10
21
20
40
1–2 years 2–5 years 5–10 years 10 years of more
Wants permanent
contract: 10%
Wants permanent
contract: 87%
Numbers too small
to analyse further
Voluntary: 57%
Involuntary: 43%
Figure 15: Permanent/temporary status of zero-hours and short-hours contract employees
Responses to the permanent/temporary question do not add to 100% because ‘don’t know’ responses are not recorded
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, summer 2015
Permanent: 50%
Temporary: 37%
Permanent: 80%
Temporary: 17%
Permanent: 88%
Temporary: 9%
Wants permanent
contract: 22%
Wants permanent
contract: 89%
Voluntary: 52%
Involuntary: 48%
Zero-hours
contract
employees
(n=368)
Short-hours
contract
employees
(n=168)
All employees
(n=2,572)
30 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 31 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Earnings
According to the LFS, mean
earnings for zero-hours contract
employees are £8 per hour,
whereas they are £13 per hour for
those not on a zero-hours contract
(see Table 10). Part of the gap can
be explained by compositional
effects: zero-hours contract
jobs tend to be concentrated in
relatively low-paid industries,
such as accommodation and food.
However, a difference exists in
every broad industry grouping,
although the gap in education –
where many zero-hours contract
employees are teachers or lecturers
– is much smaller than elsewhere.
The EO data show that half of
zero-hours contract employees and
two-thirds of short-hours
contract employees earn less than
£15,000 per year (see Figure 17).
This is primarily the result of many
people on these contracts working
part-time (58% of all part-time
employees earn less than £15,000).
Nevertheless, there are a few zero-
hours contract employees with
relatively high earnings: 9% earn
£45,000 or more.
These data are not fine-grained
enough to enable any judgement
about whether zero-hours and
short-hours contract employees are
paid the same as other employees
for doing the same kinds of work.
14
Most employers say they pay zero-
hours contract employees a similar
rate to other employees doing the
same job.
Table 10: Hourly earnings, by industry
In employment
on a zero-hours
contract
(£) Mean
In employment
and not on a
zero-hours contract
(£) Mean
Production, including agriculture 9 14
Construction * 14
Wholesale and retail 7 10
Accommodation and food 6 8
Information, finance, professional * 19
Admin and support services 8 12
Public administration * 16
Education 13 14
Health and social work 9 13
Transport, arts, other services 8 12
Total 8 13
Source: Labour Force Survey, April–June 2015
Short-hours contracts
All employees
Zero-hours contracts
Figure 17: Distribution of annual earnings (%)
80
60
70
50
40
30
20
10
0
Less than
£15,000
£15,000 to
£24,999
£25,000 to
£34,999
£35,000 to
£44,999
£45,000 to
£59,999
£60,000 or
more
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook summer 2015 (zero-hours contract employees, n=261;
short-hours contract employees, n=125; all employees, n=1,949)
49
68
24
26
20
29
10
4
19
5
5
11
4
1
9
5
2
8
31 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Job satisfaction and well-being
The proportions of zero-hours
contract and short-hours contract
employees who are either very
satisfied or satisfied with their
jobs are – at 65% and 67%
respectively – slightly higher than
the proportion for employees
as a whole, which is 63%
(see Figure 18). Similarly, the
proportions dissatisfied or very
dissatisfied with their jobs – at 16%
and 12% respectively – are lower
than the proportion for employees
as a whole (18%).
The summer 2015 EO also asked
employees four questions used
by the ONS to measure life
satisfaction and these have been
used to calculate a life satisfaction
score for each employee (which
can range from zero to a maximum
of 40).
15
The mean score for all
employees is 25.6 (see Table 11).
The mean scores for part-time
employees, zero-hours contract
employees and short-hours
contract employees are slightly
higher than for other employees.
Table 11: Distribution of life satisfaction scores
Zero-hours
contract
employees
(n=364)
Short-hours
contract
employees
(n=162)
All
temporary
employees
(n=275)
All
part-time
employees
(n=861)
All
employees
(n=2,558)
10th percentile 16 16 15 17 16
25th percentile 22 21 21 22 21
Median 26 28 26 27 26
75th percentile 32 33 31 32 31
90th percentile 36 36 35 36 35
Mean 26.2 26.8 25.5 26.7 25.6
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, summer 2015
Short-hours contracts
All temporary employees
Zero-hours contracts
All part-time employees
All employees
Figure 18: Job satisfaction (%)
Very satisfied Satisfied Neither satisfied
nor dissatisfied
Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, summer 2015 (zero-hours contract employees, n=368; short-hours contract
employees, n=168; all temporary employees, n=279, all part-time employees, n=869, all employees, n=2,558)
26
39
19
12
24
43
21
8
17
47
20
11
18
40
23
14
5
18
45
19
13
5
4
4
4
32 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 33 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Satisfaction, though, does vary
according to whether or not the
employee is content with the
number of hours they work (see
Table 12). Part-time employees
wanting to work more hours are
much less likely to be satisfied
with their job, and have lower life
satisfaction scores, than employees
who don’t want more hours.
16
This
applies regardless of whether an
employee has a zero-hours or
short-hours contract.
These data suggest that the job
satisfaction and overall well-being
of zero-hours and short-hours
contract employees are similar
to those of other employees with
similar characteristics and in similar
positions.
17
The remainder of this
section explores the summer 2015
EO data further, looking at some of
the factors known to influence job
satisfaction.
Relationships with managers and
colleagues
Zero-hours contract employees are
less likely than other employees
to say they have a manager or
supervisor or someone they report
to as part of their job. Just 60%
of zero-hours contract employees
say this is the case, with a further
17% saying they sometimes have
a manager and 23% having no
manager. A higher proportion
(75%) of short-hours contract
employees say they have a
manager and the proportion saying
they do not have a manager (8%)
is slightly lower than for employees
as a whole (9%). Not that lack of
a manager may be a bad thing as
far as the employee is concerned
– employees without a manager
have higher job satisfaction than
employees with a manager!
18
Zero-hours contract employees
who have a manager are slightly
more likely to be satisfied with
their relationship with them than
other employees are (see Table 13).
Short-hours contract employees
have an even more positive view
of their managers, with 75% either
very satisfied or satisfied with their
working relationship. Zero-hours
contract and short-hours contract
employees are just as positive
about working relationships with
colleagues as other employees.
Table 12: Job satisfaction and life satisfaction, by demand for more working hours
% very satisfied/satisfied
with their job
Mean life
satisfaction score
Zero-hours contract employees
Want more hours (n=75) 34 23.4
Do not want more hours (n=179) 75 27.7
Short-hours contract employees
Want more hours (n=52) 57 24.1
Do not want more hours (n=106) 74 28.0
All part-time employees
Want more hours (n=230) 45 24.0
Do not want more hours (n=639) 71 27.6
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, summer 2015
Table 13: Relationships with managers and colleagues
Satisfaction
with line
manager
Zero-hours
contract
employees
(n=283)
Short-hours
contract
employees
(n=154)
All
employees
(n=2,343)
Positive
relationship
with colleagues
Zero-hours
contract
employees
(n=368)
Short-hours
contract
employees
(n=168)
All
employees
(n=2,572)
Very satisfied 23 32 25 Strongly agree 32 32 27
Satisfied 46 43 40 Agree 49 50 54
Neither satisfied
nor dissatisfied
20 17 18 Neither agree
nor disagree
15 14 14
Dissatisfied 8 6 10 Disagree 2 3 3
Very dissatisfied 3 2 5 Strongly
disagree
1 <0.5 1
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, summer 2015
33 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Short-hours contracts
All temporary employees
Zero-hours contracts
All part-time employees
All employees
Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor
disagree
Disagree Strongly disagree
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, summer 2015 (zero-hours contract employees, n=368; short-hours contract
employees, n=168; all temporary employees, n=279, all part-time employees, n=869, all employees, n=2,558)
20
42
13
18
30
44
12
9
21
51
13
11
18
45
13
14
7
14
44
15
19
7
6
3
3
Figure 19: Work–Life balance (%)
‘I achieve the right balance between my work and home lives’
Work–life balance, workload,
pressure – and support in dealing
with these
Zero-hours contract employees
– and short-hours contract
employees, in particular – are more
likely to see their work–life balance
in a positive light than other
employees (see Figure 19). This
seems to occur primarily because
zero-hours and short-hours contract
employees are more likely to work
part-time than other employees.
Poor work–life balance and low
levels of job satisfaction and well-
being are often associated with
feelings of being consistently
under excessive pressure and with
heavy or uncontrollable workloads.
Over two-fifths (41%) of employees
feel under uncomfortable and
excessive pressure at work at
least once or twice a week (see
Figure 20). All the various forms
of ‘atypical’ or ‘non-standard’ work
captured in this survey have lower
proportions of employees feeling
under excessive pressure. Hence
34% of temporary employees, 32%
of zero-hours contract employees
and 26% of part-time employees
feel under excessive pressure at least
once or twice a week. Short-hours
contract employees are even less
likely to report excessive pressure.
There is a strong correlation
between perceptions of excessive
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, summer 2015 (zero-hours contract employees, n=368; short-hours contract
employees, n=168; all temporary employees, n=279, all part-time employees, n=869, all employees, n=2,558)
Short-hours contracts
All temporary employees
Zero-hours contracts
All part-time employees
All employees
Figure 20: Frequency of feeling under excessive pressure at work (%)
Every day Once or twice a
week
Once or twice a
month
Less frequently
than once a month
Never
9
23
17
31
5
9
19
30
8
18
22
31
10
24
20
29
18
14
27
24
22
12
21
36
21
34 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 35 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
pressure and excessive workloads.
19
For the 62% of employees who
think their workload is ‘about
right’, just 24% say they feel under
excessive pressure at least once
or twice a week. For the 30% who
think their workload is ‘too much’,
that proportion rises to 83% (see
Table 14).
Zero-hours contract employees
and temporary employees with
excessive workloads are as likely
as other employees in that position
to feel under pressure – but they
are much less likely to have an
excessive workload. Short-hours
contract employees are the least
likely to regard their workload as
excessive and the least likely to be
under frequent pressure even when
their workload is manageable.
The nature of zero-hours and
short-hours contracts may help
explain why employees on these
contracts are less likely to say
their workload is too much: the
link between time and outputs
(and money) may be much clearer
for these employees than it is for
employees with fixed hours, where
job descriptions, roles, workloads
and working hours can be more
elastic. A more transactional
employment relationship can have
benefits even if there are also
drawbacks in terms of involvement
and engagement (see below).
A down side, though, is that the
(smaller) proportion of zero-
hours contract employees who
do feel under excessive pressure
at work are less likely than other
employees to say there is support
available to help them deal
with it. Over two-fifths (43%)
of employees who feel under
excessive pressure at least once
or twice a week do not feel they
have any support at work – from
managers, colleagues or anywhere
else – but this proportion rises
to 59% for zero-hours contract
employees.
20
Zero-hours contract and short-
hours contract employees tend
not to have a more negative
assessment of the support
provided by their employer and
manager (see Table 15). There
is an exception: zero-hours
contract employees are less likely
than other employees to agree
their managers support them in
managing their work–life balance.
This may be due to the variability
and instability of working hours
that is sometimes associated with
zero-hours, such as when work is
offered and/or withdrawn at short
notice. It could also reflect the
general uncertainty that zero-hours
contracts can engender.
Job challenge and opportunities
for progression
Zero-hours contract employees are
as satisfied with their job role and
the degree of challenge it offers
as other employees (see Figure
21). However, they are slightly less
likely to think their employer gives
Table 14: Relationship between perceptions of workload and excessive pressure
Zero-hours
contract
employees
(n=368)
Short-hours
contract
employees
(n=168)
Temporary
employees
(n=279)
All
part-time
employees
(n=861)
All
employees
(n=2,572)
% saying workload is ‘about right’ 74 79 72 73 62
of which: % under excessive pressure at least
once or twice a week
24 12 27 16 24
% saying workload is ‘too much’ 15 9 15 18 30
of which: % under excessive pressure at least
once or twice a week
77 * 80 74 83
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, summer 2015
35 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
them opportunities to learn and
grow. The previous section found
that 82% of employers of zero-
hours contract workers say they
are eligible for company training
and development, but this may
not mean they are eligible for
development opportunities that
enable them to enhance their
skills beyond those required for
the current job. Alternatively, as
zero-hours contract employees
tend to be employed in low-paid
industries and low-skilled jobs,
this may reflect a general lack
of development opportunities
for employees in these jobs.
The concentration of zero-hours
contract employees in part-
time roles is also a factor: the
proportion of full-time zero-hours
contract employees who strongly
agree or agree that their job gives
them opportunities to learn and
grow is slightly higher than it is
for full-time employees as a whole
(49% versus 47%). In contrast,
short-hours contract employees
are more satisfied with their job
role and the opportunities to learn
and grow than other employees.
Table 15: Perceived managerial and organisational support
Zero-hours
contract
employees
(n=368)
Short-hours
contract
employees
(n=168)
Temporary
employees
(n=279)
All
part-time
employees
(n=861)
All
employees
(n=2,572)
‘My manager provides support to help me manage
my work–life balance’ (% strongly agree/agree)
27 37 35 39 35
‘My organisation provides support to help me
manage my work–life balance’ (% strongly agree/
agree)
28 35 27 35 31
‘Thinking about your manager or boss or the person
you report to as part of your job, to what extent do
you feel they are considerate of your well-being at
work?’ (% very/fairly considerate)
74 83 76 77 75
‘To what extent do you feel your organisation as a
whole is considerate of its employees’ well-being at
work?’ (% very/fairly considerate)
65 75 68 67 67
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, summer 2015
Short-hours contracts
All employees
Zero-hours contracts
Figure 21: Job content and challenge (%)
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, summer 2015 (zero-hours contract employees, n=364; short-hours contract
employees, n=162, all employees, n=2,558)
My job is as challenging as I would
like it to be
My organisation gives me the
opportunities to learn and grow
I am satisfied with the content of
my job role
64
65
63
41
48
45
66
75
63
% strongly agree/agree
36 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 37 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Employee involvement
Zero-hours contract employees
are less likely to feel well informed
about what is going on at their
workplace than other employees
(see Table 15). Less than half of
them (43%) feel fully or fairly
well informed, compared with
56% of all employees and 60% of
short-hours contract employees.
This carries through into less
satisfaction with the opportunities
they have to feed their views
and ideas upwards within the
organisation. Whereas 36% of
zero-hours contract employees
are very satisfied or satisfied
with the opportunities available,
the proportions are 44% for all
employees and 50% for short-
hours contract employees.
Dissatisfaction with opportunities
for upwards communication is
usually the result of employees
not feeling well informed. Almost
four-fifths (78%) of those zero-
hours contract employees who do
feel fully or fairly well informed
about what’s going on are very
satisfied or satisfied with their
ability to make their views known
– comparable figures for short-
hours contract employees and
all employees are 86% and 88%
respectively.
Table 16: Satisfaction with communication and opportunities for upwards feedback
Communication
within
organisation
Zero-hours
contract
employees
(n=283)
Short-hours
contract
employees
(n=154)
All
employees
(n=2,343)
Satisfaction
with
opportunities
to feed views
upwards
Zero-hours
contract
employees
(n=283)
Short-hours
contract
employees
(n=154)
All
employees
(n=2,343)
Fully informed 9 19 11 Very satisfied 14 20 12
Fairly well
informed
34 41 45 Satisfied 22 30 32
Receive limited
amount of
information
39 22 30 Neither
satisfied nor
dissatisfied
33 32 29
Get to hear very
little
16 18 12 Dissatisfied 24 14 21
Don’t know 2 0 1 Very
dissatisfied
6 4 6
Source: CIPD Employee Outlook survey, summer 2015
‘Zero-hours
contract employees
are less likely to
feel well informed
about what is
going on at their
workplace than
other employees.’
37 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Zero-hours and short-hours
contracts look set to become
a permanent feature of the UK
labour market, even if their use
changes over time in response to
economic conditions and changes
in business models, production
processes, service availability and
customer preferences. Employee
preferences – for and against them
– and the publicity attached to
them will also have some effect on
whether and how they are used.
The spring 2015 LMO asked all
employers whether they thought
zero-hours contracts would be
a short-term, medium-term or
long-term feature of the UK
employment market. Two-fifths
of employers (39%) think they
will be a long-term feature – in
other words, around for the
next four years, if not longer. A
slightly larger proportion (43%)
see them as a short- to medium-
term feature of the labour market,
with 18% unsure. Employers in the
public and voluntary sectors and
employers already using zero-
hours contract workers are more
likely to see them as a long-term
feature of the labour market.
The proportion of employers
suggesting they might be a
transient form of employment
practice is surprisingly high given
how long some employers have
been using zero-hours contracts.
Technology now allows many
employers to make rapid short-
term forecasts of both customer
demand and staffing requirements,
creating the opportunity for highly
flexible contingent work. It is
difficult to see this trend going
into reverse.
In addition, a fifth of employees
with these contracts have been
with their current employer for five
years or more. Zero-hours contracts
clearly suit some employees, who
may prefer these terms even if their
employer offered them guaranteed
minimum hours.
There has been little change since
2013 in how zero-hours contracts
are used
For zero-hours contracts,
comparisons can be made with
the CIPD surveys of employers and
employees carried out in 2013 (see
Table 17). It is striking how similar
most of the results are.
Although the number of people
employed on zero-hours contracts
has increased, there is no evidence
of any qualitative shift in why
they are used, how they are
Conclusions
Table 17: Comparative survey data on zero-hours contracts
2013 2015
Employers using zero-hours contracts:
% of employers using zero-hours contracts 23 25
% of workforce covered by zero-hours contracts 19 20
% who regard zero-hours contract workers as employees 64 67
% who give zero-hours contract workers written contracts of employment 74 81
% who pay zero-hours contract staff the same rate as other staff doing the same job 64 63
% where zero-hours contract staff are eligible for company training and development 76 82
Employees on zero-hours contracts:
Mean hours worked 23.7 23.9
% wanting to work more hours 32 38
% earning less than £15,000 per year 50 49
% very satisfied/satisfied with their job 65 65
% strongly agree/agree they have the right balance between work and home life 65 62
% feeling under excessive pressure at least once or twice a week 29 32
Sources: Employer data: summer and autumn 2013 and spring and summer 2015 CIPD Labour Market Outlook surveys; employee data: autumn 2013 and summer
2015 Employee Outlook surveys
38 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 39 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
used or in their impact on either
organisations or individuals.
Almost two-thirds of zero-hours
contract employees are satisfied
with their job, but one-sixth are
dissatisfied (see Figure 18). These
proportions are very similar to
those for employees as a whole,
which suggests that, for those
employed on zero-hours contracts,
the pros and cons of these
arrangements balance each other.
Zero-hours contract employees are
more likely than other employees
to have hours (and earnings)
that vary from week to week –
including the possibility of spells
when there is no work and thus no
income from work. This variability
will be a source of anxiety to
some, especially for those faced
with large and regular financial
commitments. It can be seen in
lower job satisfaction among those
who want to work more hours (a
characteristic shared with other
part-time employees wanting
more hours). But other zero-hours
contract employees will regard
uncertainty as an acceptable price
for the freedom to turn down
work at short notice in order to do
other things. As yet, no research
has been carried out on the
contribution that earnings from
zero-hours contract work make
to household finances. However,
zero-hours contract work is most
prevalent among young people
(especially students) and people
over the age of 50, groups who
may be less likely than others to
have high and regular financial
commitments or lack alternative
income sources.
Zero-hours contract employees are
as satisfied as other employees
with the job itself and with
relationships with colleagues
and managers (where they have
an identified manager). But a
larger proportion don’t feel well
informed about what is happening
in their workplace and a smaller
proportion feel their job gives
them opportunities to learn and
grow. On the other hand, they are
less likely to think their workload
is too much, less likely to find
themselves under excessive
pressure on a regular basis and
more likely to be satisfied with
their work–life balance. There is a
suggestion here that zero-hours
contract workers are more likely to
have a more distant, transactional
employment relationship than
the norm – one where work is
measured (and paid) by the hour,
with less engagement in the long-
term future of the employer and
the employee. It is impossible
to ascertain the extent to which
this is the result of employers
wanting low-maintenance, flexible
labour or employees wanting low-
maintenance, no-strings work. This
argument could also apply to some
other forms of work – temporary
and agency work, in particular.
Nevertheless, provided there is
sufficient turnover in the labour
market and people have access
to reliable information about
working conditions, most people
will gravitate towards work that
provides at least a reasonable
fit with their preferences and
circumstances, especially if labour
market conditions allow potential
employees a degree of choice
over which job offers to accept
and reject. So while zero-hours
contract work will not be a good
fit for some employees, the fact
that it seems to work reasonably
well for many employees on these
contracts should not be a surprise.
Short-hours contract work is
qualitatively different from zero-
hours contract work
This report also provides
comparisons between zero-
hours contracts and short-hours
contracts – the latter are defined
‘A lmost two-thirds
of zero-hours
contract employees
are satisfied with
their job, but
one-sixth are
dissatisfied.’
39 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
as contracts that offer up to
eight hours a week of guaranteed
employment. On the face of it,
these types of contract would
appear close substitutes for
zero-hours contracts. However,
the evidence suggests there
are sometimes quite substantial
differences between the two:
both in how they are used by
employers and in their suitability to
employees.
Short-hours contracts are less
widely used by employers –
there are an estimated 400,000
employees with these types of
contract. Most employers use
either short-hours contracts or
zero-hours contracts but not both.
On average, employees on short-
hours contracts work less than
half the hours each week of zero-
hours contract employees. The
distribution of hours worked is
more compact and most short-
hours contract employees usually
work no more than a few hours
in excess of their guaranteed
minimum.
Short-hours contract employees
have very high levels of job
satisfaction. Like zero-hours
contract employees, they are less
likely than other employees to feel
overworked or under excessive
pressure. Unlike zero-hours
contract employees, however,
they are very positive about their
involvement in the workplace and
the learning opportunities available
to them.
These differences mean their
experience does not provide
any reliable guide to what might
happen if a minimum hours
guarantee – or the right to request
a minimum guaranteed number
of hours – was ever introduced
for existing zero-hours contract
employees.
There is room for improvement
in the operation of zero-hours
contracts but there is not a strong
case for more legislation
There are still unresolved issues
around the operation of zero-
hours contracts for at least some
employees. There has been an
increase in the proportion of
employees receiving written
statements of terms and
conditions but there is still room
for improvement here, both in
clarifying employment status and
in codifying procedures for the
cancellation of work at short notice
and termination of a zero-hours
contract. This could be achieved
in part through greater use of
model contracts, but the CIPD
also believes all workers should be
legally entitled to a written copy
of their terms and conditions not
later than after two months in
employment (currently, under the
Employment Rights Act 1996, only
employees are entitled to this).
In addition, it is unclear why
some private sector employers
have chosen to make zero-hours
contracts the norm within their
organisations. Uncertainty over
staffing requirements is unlikely
to be so pervasive that it requires
the vast majority of the workforce
to be on zero-hours contracts.
Employers who have chosen this
option should be clear with the
workforce and other stakeholders
about the reasons why they have
taken this decision, given the
likelihood of negative publicity
– which may be deserved or
undeserved.
The available evidence does
not provide a strong case for
further legislation to regulate
the use of zero-hours contracts.
The Government has introduced
legislation that prohibits
clauses preventing zero-hours
workers from working for other
organisations if their primary
employer has no work for
them. In the CIPD’s view, this
is a proportionate response to
a problem highlighted in CIPD
(2013b), which found that 20% of
zero-hours employees said they
were sometimes (17%) or always
(3%) penalised in some way for not
being available for work.
If policy-makers do want to
intervene further to improve the
rights of zero-hours workers, the
CIPD has suggested introducing
a right for zero-hours contract
workers to request regular
hours after they have been in
employment with an organisation
for 12 months. This would allow
zero-hours contract workers who
have built up a record of service
with an employer, and who work
a consistent number of hours, a
light-touch route to a reasonable
degree of stability and financial
security. However, as with the
right to request flexible working
arrangements, employers would be
able to refuse such requests when
there is an adequate business
reason for doing so.
Some opponents of zero-hours
contracts still favour an outright
ban. This could do more harm than
good. The research findings in this
report and in CIPD (2013b) suggest
that the majority of zero-hours
contract employees are satisfied
with their jobs and choose to work
in this way. Prohibiting contracts
that give employees an option
to turn work down could lead to
some employees being forced to
withdraw from the labour force.
Nor would it do much to improve
job security or financial security:
employers with little concern
for their employees’ well-being
could simply change contracts to
guarantee a very small minimum
number of hours or replace zero-
hours contracts with casual labour.
40 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 41 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
The best way to improve the
working lives of the zero-hours
contract workforce is to help
more employers understand why
they need to develop flexible and
fair working practices and how
to implement them. Zero-hours
contracts can provide flexibility for
both employers and individuals if
employers ensure they are used in
the following ways:
• Employers should use zero-
hours contracts only where the
flexibility inherent in these types
of arrangement suits both the
organisation and the individual.
• Employers should consider
whether zero-hours working is
appropriate for their business
and if there are alternative
means of providing flexibility for
the organisation, for example
through the use of annualised
hours or other flexible working
options. Zero-hours working
lends itself to situations where
the workload is irregular, there
is not a constant need for staff
or staff needs are driven by
external factors outside the
employer’s control.
• All zero-hours contract workers
should receive a written copy of
their terms and conditions.
• Employers should set out in the
contract the employment status
of those engaged on zero-hours
contracts and conduct regular
reviews (at least once a year)
of how these contracts are
operating in practice. Reviews
should include conversations
with line managers and staff
on zero-hours contracts. If
the reality of the employment
relationship no longer matches
the contract of employment, one
or the other should be adjusted
to bring them into line.
• Employers need to provide
training and guidance for line
managers to ensure they are
managing zero-hours workers
in line with their employment
status. Training must ensure
that line managers are aware
that zero-hours workers have
a legal right to work for other
employers when there is no
work available from their
primary employer.
• Employers should provide zero-
hours workers with reasonable
compensation if pre-arranged
work is cancelled with little or
no notice. The CIPD believes
a reasonable minimum would
be to reimburse any travel
expenses incurred and provide
at least an hour’s pay as
compensation. Some employers
appear to go further than this;
for example, paying employees
in full for shifts cancelled
at short notice. This would
seem a reasonable position
if organisations also prevent
or penalise employees from
cancelling pre-arranged work
at short notice. Compensating
employees for short-notice
cancellation also imposes
discipline on line managers, as
short-notice cancellations will
in some cases be the result of
lazy or inadequate management
rather than genuine variability in
staff demand and availability.
• Employers should ensure there
are comparable rates of pay
for people doing the same
job regardless of differences
in their employment status.
This could be written into
employment policies and terms
and conditions, with practice
reviewed periodically.
‘The best way
to improve the
working lives of
the zero-hours
contract workforce
is to help more
employers
understand why
they need to
develop flexible
and fair working
practices and
how to implement
them.’
41 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
BIS. (2015) Zero hours contracts:
guidance for employers [online].
London: Department for Business,
Innovation and Skills. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/
publications/zero-hours-contracts-
guidance-for-employers/zero-hours-
contracts-guidance-for-employers
[Accessed 16 November 2015].
CIPD. (2013a) Employee outlook:
autumn 2013 [online]. London:
Chartered Institute of Personnel
and Development. Available
at: http://www.cipd.co.uk/
hr-resources/survey-reports/
employee-outlook-autumn-2013.
aspx [Accessed 16 November 2015].
CIPD. (2013b) Zero-hours
contracts: myth and reality [online].
London: Chartered Institute of
Personnel and Development.
Available at: http://www.cipd.
co.uk/hr-resources/research/zero-
hours-contracts-myth-reality.aspx
[Accessed 16 November 2015].
CIPD. (2013c) Zero-hours contracts:
understanding the law [online].
London: Chartered Institute of
Personnel and Development.
Available at: http://www.cipd.co.uk/
hr-resources/guides/zero-hours-
contracts-understanding-law.aspx
[Accessed 16 November 2015].
CIPD. (2014a) Consultation on
zero-hours employment contracts:
submission to the Department
for Business, Innovation and
Skills [online]. London: Chartered
Institute of Personnel and
Development. Available at:
http://www.cipd.co.uk/binaries/
zero-hours-employment-
contracts_2014-dbis.pdf [Accessed
16 November 2015].
CIPD. (2014b) Megatrends: are
UK organisations getting better at
managing their people? [online].
London: Chartered Institute of
Personnel and Development.
Available at: http://www.cipd.
co.uk/hr-resources/research/
uk-organisations-managing-people.
aspx [Accessed 16 November 2015].
CIPD. (2015a) Labour market
outlook: spring 2015 [online].
London: Chartered Institute of
Personnel and Development.
Available at: http://www.cipd.
co.uk/hr-resources/survey-
reports/labour-market-outlook-
spring-2015.aspx [Accessed 16
November 2015].
CIPD. (2015b) Labour market
outlook: summer 2015 [online].
London: Chartered Institute of
Personnel and Development.
Available at: https://www.cipd.
co.uk/hr-resources/survey-
reports/labour-market-outlook-
summer-2015.aspx [Accessed 16
November 2015].
CIPD. (2015c) Investing in
productivity: unlocking ambition
[online]. London: Chartered Institute
of Personnel and Development.
Available at: https://www.cipd.
co.uk/publicpolicy/policy-reports/
investing-productivity-unlocking-
ambition.aspx [Accessed 16
November 2015].
ONS. (2015) Employment
contracts that do not guarantee a
minimum number of hours: 2015
update [online]. London: Office
for National Statistics. Available
at: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/
dcp171776_415332.pdf [Accessed
16 November 2015].
TUC. (2015) The decent jobs
deficit: the human cost of zero-
hours working in the UK [online].
London: Trades Union Congress.
Available at: https://www.
tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/
DecentJobsDeficitReport_0.pdf
[Accessed 16 November 2015].
USDAW. (2014) Zero-hours and
short-hours contracts [online].
Manchester: Union of Shop,
Distribution and Allied Workers.
Available at: https://www.usdaw.
org.uk/CMSPages/GetFile.
aspx?guid=0588a567-2f5a-455e-
b4d7-f8c10b354585 [Accessed 16
November 2015].
WINTERBOTHAM, M., VIVIAN, D.,
SHURY, J., DAVIES, B. and KIK,
G. (2014) The UK Commission’s
Employer Skills Survey 2013: UK
results. UKCES Evidence Report
No. 81. London: UKCES.
WOOD, S., BURRIDGE, M., GREEN,
W., NOLTE, S., RUDOFF, D. and
NI LUANAIGH, A. (2013) High
performance working in the
Employer Skills Surveys. UKCES
Evidence Report No. 71. London:
UKCES.
WU, N., BACON, N. and HOQUE,
K. (2014) The adoption of high
performance work practices in small
businesses: the influence of markets,
business characteristics and HR
expertise. International Journal of
Human Resource Management. Vol
25, No 8. pp1149–1169.
References
42 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives 43 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
1
The survey carried out in August 2014 produced a higher number (1.8 million). However, the ONS advise against comparisons with the
January surveys because seasonal factors may be very important.
2
However, wherever cell sizes are reported, these are unweighted. Estimates based on cell sizes where unweighted n<50 are not reported.
3
There are a small number of employers who responded to both the spring and summer 2015 LMOs and said they used short-hours
or zero-hours contracts. ‘Duplicate’ observations have been removed from the combined dataset, so there is just one observation per
employer.
4
These results appear consistent with the ONS business survey for January 2015, where accommodation and food, health and social work,
and education were the three industries where the proportion of employers using contracts without minimum guaranteed hours is well
above average (ONS 2015).
5
For employers of zero-hours contract workers, precise comparisons cannot be made with a similar question in the autumn 2013 LMO
(reported in Figure 6 of CIPD 2013a) because the spring 2015 question included two additional response options – whether or not working
days varied greatly each week – that were together selected by 6% of zero-hours contract employers. However, the broad pattern of
response appears similar.
6
Descriptions of the various categories of organisation culture and mindset collected in the summer 2015 LMO can be found in CIPD
(2015c).
7
These associations were analysed systematically by running logistic regressions with a binary choice dependent variable (whether or not
to use zero-hours/short-hours contracts) and industry, organisation size, sector, mindset, product/service strategy, organisation culture
and temporary contract workforce share as control variables. For the regression for zero-hours contracts – Pseudo R²=0.17 – the only
significant variables were organisation size (which had a positive effect on the likelihood of using zero-hours contracts in organisations
with 1,000+ employees), organisations with a cost-cutter mindset (negative effect) and the percentage of the workforce on temporary
contracts (positive effect wherever these were used, especially where 11%+ of workers were on temporary contracts). For the regression
for short-hours contracts – Pseudo R²=0.25 – the only significant variables were organisation size (positive effect in all organisations with
10+ employees, but largest in organisations with 1,000+ employees), the percentage of the workforce on temporary contracts (positive
effect wherever these were used, especially where 11%+ of workers were on temporary contracts) and product/service strategy (positive
effect in organisations with a basic/standard approach to quality).
8
Seven per cent of employers say they use a combination of workers and employees (respondents could select more than one category).
9
When the autumn 2013 LMO took place, only employers with 1,250 or more employees would definitely have been covered by auto-
enrolment (those with a staging date of 1 September 2013 or earlier). By spring 2015, all employers with 50 or more employees – and
many employers with between 30 and 49 employees – would have had their staging date.
10
People who described themselves as self-employed were filtered out of the summer 2015 Employee Outlook survey.
11
Among 16–24-year-old zero-hours contract employees who have left full-time education, 63% have GCSE, A Level or equivalent and/or
higher education qualifications. The proportion is 59% for those aged 50–64 and 52% for those aged 65 or over.
12
Even for employees with ‘fixed hours’ contracts, actual hours can deviate from usual hours because of planned and unplanned absence
(annual leave, sick leave) or because of variations in paid and unpaid overtime.
13
A direct comparison with the LFS data cannot be made because the EO did not ask full-time employees if they wanted more hours. The
number of ‘involuntary’ part-time employees on short-hours contracts was too small to provide reliable estimates of how many of these
wanted more hours. For part-time employees on zero-hours contracts, a direct comparison can be made with the summer 2013 EO data
reported in CIPD (2013b). In 2013, 38% of part-time zero-hours contract employees wanted to work more hours, compared with 32% in
2015.
14
Hourly earnings can be calculated from the EO but insufficient data means many observations have to be discarded, making the residual
calculations unreliable. In addition, the EO did not collect data on job tenure and occupation.
15
The four questions are: Q1: ‘How satisfied are you with your life nowadays?’, Q2: ‘To what extent do you feel the things you do in your life
are worthwhile?’, Q3: ‘How happy did you feel yesterday?’ and Q4: ‘How anxious did you feel yesterday?’. In each case, respondents are
asked to select a value ranging from zero (‘not at all’) to ten (‘completely’). Q4 has been reverse-coded so that zero is completely anxious
and ten is not at all anxious. The four values have then been added to produce a score for each individual.
16
Employees were not asked if they wanted to work fewer hours.
Endnotes
43 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
17
This was tested formally by running regression equations for job satisfaction and the life satisfaction score controlling for a range
of other variables, including gender, age, region, managerial status (as a partial proxy for occupation), industry, organisation size,
sector of employment, highest educational qualification, earnings, perceptions of workload, work–life balance and excessive pressure,
job challenge, relationship with managers and colleagues, perceived managerial and organisational support, part-time/full-time and
permanent/temporary status. Perceived mental and physical health and job satisfaction were also entered as controls into the regression
for life satisfaction score. None of the coefficients on the ‘atypical’ employment variables – zero-hours contracts, short-hours contracts,
temporary employment or part-time employment – were statistically significant in either regression. The lack of any significant coefficient
for part-time work was unexpected but this may be because, unlike many analyses, these regressions explicitly controlled for perceptions
of work–life balance, workload and excessive pressure at work.
18
Excluding owner/proprietors and those either running an organisation or at its top layer, job satisfaction among employees with no
manager is higher (66% very satisfied/satisfied) than it is for employees with a manager (61%) or employees who sometimes have a
manager (55%).
19
For employees as a whole, the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient between feeling under excessive pressure and perceptions of
workload is highly significant at –0.55 (excessive pressure is scored from 1=every day to 5=never, whereas perceived workload is scored
from 1=too little to 3=too much).
20
There are too few short-hours contract employees who are regularly under excessive pressure to calculate reliable estimates for this
group.
44 Zero-hours and short-hours contracts in the UK: Employer and employee perspectives
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development
151 The Broadway London SW19 1JQ United Kingdom
T +44 (0)20 8612 6200 F +44 (0)20 8612 6201
E cipd@cipd.co.uk W cipd.co.uk
Incorporated by Royal Charter
Registered as a charity in England and Wales (1079797) and Scotland (SC045154)
Issued: December 2015 Reference: 7i53
© CIPD 2015
