Summary
The paper presents findings from the first study on zero hours work in Ireland. The paper aims to assess the operation of zero hours work, the outcomes of such work on employers and workers and assess possible public responses to such work with a view to protecting workers. Particular attention is paid to developments in four sectors – retail, hospitality, health and education.
Theoretical Base
The paper draws from two literatures. The first is the precarious work literature which highlights the characteristics of precarious jobs and the impact of such jobs on workers and the State (Acemoglu, 2001; Cranford et al., 2003; Kalleberg, 2012; McKay et al., 2011). This paper contributes to this literature by examining zero hours work, a form of precarious work for which there is a limited but growing research body. In examining potential public policy responses to zero hours work, we also draw from legal regulation literature on how legal systems can reflect the reality of modern labour markets and protect workers. The European Commission has noted that the tests to distinguish an employee in many legal systems are no longer an adequate depiction of the economic and social reality of work. This comment is particularly relevant for people on zero hours work, who occupy a grey area in law (Adams et al., 2015; Barnard, 2014; Deakin, 2014).
Research Questions and Methodology
The paper aims to address the following research question: how does zero hours work operate in Ireland? We will also examine the outcomes of zero hours work for employers and employees. The study uses a mixed methods design with quantitative and qualitative data. The primary method used was qualitative interviews with 36 interviews with informed stakeholders (13 employer/business representative organisations, 8 trade unions, 5 government departments/agencies, 4 NGOs and 4 legal experts). The qualitative data was supplemented by an analysis of two surveys. The first is the Quarterly National Household Survey (QNHS) from the Central Statistics Office. The total quarterly sample is designed to be 26,000 households. Overall the QNHS provides a comprehensive and detailed view of the structure of working hours and working patterns by gender, age, occupation and industrial sector in the labour market. We report the number and characteristics of employees who regularly work constantly variable hours. The second survey used is the 2010 European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS), a European-wide survey undertaken by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. The sample size for Ireland was 1,003 respondents of whom 815 were employees. We examine data in the EWCS on employees’ control of their working hours.
Findings
We find that policy discourse on zero hours work in Ireland has been hampered by legislative definitions. Irish employment law recognises a zero hours contract as one in which the employee is not guaranteed hours of work but is required to make themselves available for work with an employer. Under this contract, there is a legislative entitlement to some guaranteed pay. We find that zero hours contracts are not prevalent. However, there is evidence of zero hours work through so-called ‘If and When’ contracts which involve no guaranteed hours of work but also no contractual requirement for an individual to be available for work. These contracts are not recognised in legislation and individuals with such contracts have no entitlement to any compensation for hours not worked. Zero hours work through ‘If and When contracts’ is prevalent across hospitality, in certain occupations in education (primary and second level teaching, third level lecturing and further education, school support staff), and in health (homecare workers). A number of factors contribute to zero hours work including the presence of demand-led services, the lack of legal regulation of ‘If and When’ contracts, state funding models in education and health and poor childcare services for employees.
In terms of the impact on employees, employer bodies argue that zero hours work provides flexibility for employees particularly mothers and students, enhances skills and is an alternative to unemployment. Trade unions and NGOs are highly critical of such work, referring to a number of negative consequences for workers including unpredictable hours and income, difficulties with family life, difficulties accessing social welfare entitlements and the scheduling of work hours as a method of controlling employees. In addition, a pressing legal issue is that individuals on ‘If and When’ contracts are unlikely to satisfy the tests for being ‘an employee’ and therefore are not protected by most employment legislation.
Implications
The paper concludes by outlining options for regulating zero hours work which include limiting contractual freedoms legislatively, collective bargaining and a reorientation of state funding models for public services.
References
Adams, A., Freedland, M. and Prassl J. (2015) The Zero Hours Contract: Regulating Casual Work or Legitimising Precarity. University of Oxford Legal Research Paper Series, Paper No. 00/2015.
Barnard, C. (2014) Non Standard Employment; What Can the EU Do? Keynote paper, European Labour Law Network-7th Annual Legal Seminar, New Forms of Employment and EU law, 27-28 November, The Hague, Netherlands.
CIPD (2013) Zero Hour Contracts: Myth and Reality. London: CIPD.
Commission of The European Communities (2006) Green Gaper, Modernising Labour Law to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century. Brussels, COM (2006)708.
Kalleberg, A.L. (2012), ‘Job Quality and Precarious Work: Clarifications, Controversies, and Challenges’, Work and Occupations, 39: 427–448.
McKay, S., Clark, N., and Paraskevopoulou, A. (2011), Precarious Work in Europe Causes and consequences for the Agriculture, Food and Tourism sectors, Brussels: European Federation of Food, Agriculture and Tourism Trade Union.
