Zero hours contracts have been the subject of debate and media
attention for some time now as they continue to be used by
employers whose needs for workers fluctuate. The most up-to-date
Office for National Statistics report on zero hours contracts,
published in September 2015, stated that around 744,000 people were
employed on zero hours contracts in their main employment between
April and June 2015, representing 2.4 per cent of all people in
employment. Zero hours contracts are often used within, for
example, the retail industry, and no doubt this figure will have
risen to accommodate the Christmas shopping rush, even if the now
infamous Black Friday sales were not quite as eventful this year as
Much has been said about the pros and cons of zero hours
contracts, with the exclusivity clauses which they often contain
coming under particular scrutiny.
Section 27A(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA) defines
an exclusivity clause as:
"Any provision of a zero hours contract which (a) prohibits
the worker from doing work or performing services under another
contract or under any other arrangement, or (b) prohibits the
worker from doing so without the employer's consent."
An exclusivity clause could, in effect, therefore limit a worker
from working for someone else, even though the employer with whom
that employee had contracted was not obliged to provide them with
any paid work.
Whilst section 27A of the ERA was enacted in response to this
problem, rendering such clauses unenforceable, the efficacy of this
amendment was questionable since an employer could simply choose
not to give any work to an employee who did work for another
However, the Exclusivity Terms in Zero Hours Contracts (Redress)
Regulations 2015, which came into force on 11 January 2016, seek to
remove the ability of employers to circumvent section 27A,
Any dismissal of an employee employed
under a zero hours contract is automatically unfair if the reason
or principal reason for the dismissal is that that employee had
breached a contractual clause prohibiting him or her from working
for another employer. An employee who is dismissed on these grounds
is, therefore, able to bring an unfair dismissal claim before an
Employment Tribunal seeking a declaration and/or compensation.
There is no qualifying period
required for a zero hours employee to be able to bring such an
unfair dismissal claim.
It is unlawful to subject a zero
hours worker to any detriment if they work for another employer in
breach of a clause prohibiting them from doing so. (This third
provision extends to workers, not just employees.)
Finally section 27A of the ERA has been given the bite that
Parliament intended when the amendment to the ERA was first enacted
in May 2015.
Dentons is the world's first polycentric global law firm. A
top 20 firm on the Acritas 2015 Global Elite Brand Index, the Firm
is committed to challenging the status quo in delivering consistent
and uncompromising quality and value in new and inventive ways.
Driven to provide clients a competitive edge, and connected to the
communities where its clients want to do business, Dentons knows
that understanding local cultures is crucial to successfully
completing a deal, resolving a dispute or solving a business
challenge. Now the world's largest law firm, Dentons'
global team builds agile, tailored solutions to meet the local,
national and global needs of private and public clients of any size
in more than 125 locations serving 50-plus countries.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
The seminar will take place on 31 March 2017. It aims to provide German companies with an overview of the latest developments in relation to insurance coverage, banking transactions and legal aspects of doing business with Iran.
The employment landscape is one that is constantly shifting. Employers who fail to keep up with the changes do so at their peril.
We are pleased to invite you to this seminar, designed to help in-house counsel and HR practitioners get to grips with key recent and forthcoming developments in employment, pensions and immigration law and practice and what they mean for your workforce.
In SSE Generation Limited v Hochtief Solutions AG and another decided on 21st December 2016, the Court of Session in Scotland considered a contractor's potential design liability under the NEC Form of Contract.
Case law concerning the Agency Worker Regulations remains limited. We recently advised a recruitment business involved in a dispute with a "temp" and a hirer regarding who was liable for an alleged breach of AWR Regulation 5.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).