Unions expressed disappointment as the UK government revealed detailed plans to ban zero-hours contracts, proposing a guaranteed minimum of between eight and 20 hours per week based on regular working patterns. The move has drawn criticism from both unions and employer groups.
Government Proposes Guaranteed Hours
Under rules expected to take effect next year, employers will be required to offer staff, including agency workers, a contract guaranteeing a minimum number of weekly hours based on their regular work schedule. A consultation launched on Tuesday outlines the government's preference for workers to receive between eight and 20 guaranteed hours per week.
Businesses would determine a worker's regular hours over a 12-week reference period under the preferred option. Workers may choose to remain on a zero-hours contract but would be eligible for compensation if shifts are changed at short notice.
Over one million people in the UK currently work on zero-hours contracts, spanning sectors from hospitality and retail to warehouses and healthcare.
Part of Labour's Employment Rights Act
The changes are part of Labour's Employment Rights Act, enacted late last year. The package faced significant opposition from the Conservatives and business groups.
Business Secretary Peter Kyle stated: "It's not right that people can work regular hours but still have no certainty about their pay from week to week. These vital changes will mean more certainty for millions of people and will save the lowest paid workers hundreds of pounds."
He added: "We're consulting because we need to get the detail right to ensure these reforms work in practice and guard against unintended consequences from this major change to the labour market."
Union Criticism
Unions voiced disappointment that the government's proposal caps guaranteed hours at 20 per week, which could be less than half the regular hours for some zero-hours workers.
Joanne Thomas, general secretary of the shopworkers' union Usdaw, said: "It is deeply disappointing that the government is intending to not give all workers the right to a guaranteed hours contract, despite that being the very clear manifesto commitment."
She highlighted that many members are on short-hours contracts, routinely working significantly more hours than contracted, with additional hours removable at the employer's discretion, leaving workers without stability or security. Young people, women, disabled workers, and minority communities are disproportionately affected.
The Trades Union Congress warned against "bad faith scaremongering" on guaranteed hours, which could leave many workers facing ongoing job insecurity. TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: "Workers should know how much they'll be earning from week to week instead of being at the whim of a bad employer who could cut shifts last minute."
Employer Concerns
Employer groups warned that over-regulation could jeopardise jobs, especially for young people facing an employment squeeze. They called for a longer reference period and the right to retain zero-hours contracts in certain circumstances.
Kate Nicholls, chair of UKHospitality, which represents thousands of restaurants, cafes, pubs, and hotels, said retaining access to zero-hours contracts was "crucial." She argued that a 26-week reference period would provide "a fairer and more accurate reflection of a team member's regular work pattern," accounting for the seasonal nature of hospitality.
She cautioned: "There is a danger that over-regulating flexible work actually increases work instability, rather than decrease it, which would undermine the government's agenda to get people back into work."
Helen Dickinson, chief executive of the British Retail Consortium, representing most major retailers, stated: "With over a million young people out of work or education, government cannot afford to get this wrong. Crack down on bad employers by all means, but not by adding costs and rules that deter good employers from hiring in the first place."
The BRC warned that a 12-week reference period could force retailers to reduce part-time workers during busy periods like Christmas. It added that classifying contracts up to 20 hours as 'low-hours' would be "disproportionate" and requiring up to four weeks' notice for shift changes would be "out of step with the realities of retail."
