One of the biggest controversies of recent weeks has been the widespread use of “zero hours” contracts currently in use by some of the UK’s most successful companies. Under these contracts, employees have no guarantee of a set minimum of working hours per week and receive no benefits deemed standard by the majority of UK workers, including sick pay and holiday leave.
However, cinema chain Cineworld has this week defended its use of zero hours contracts, and has pledged to continue using them for both existing and new staff members on its team. At present, around 80 per cent of its workforce, some 3,600 employees, are signatories of the controversial contracts.
Zero hours contracts are particularly useful to companies looking to improve their bottom line by spending only what is necessary on employee wages. Should business be slow on a certain day, or alternatively be busier than usual, employees on zero hours contracts can be sent home or called in at short notice in order to meet fluctuations in consumer demand.
Chief executive and founder of Cineworld, Stephen Wiener, doesn’t believe that his staff are unhappy with their present situation.
He says; “I started in this industry as an usher many years ago on a zero hours contract, so I know what it’s like.
“I don’t know of any employees that are disgruntled with the current working arrangements and there are no plans to change that.”
He also firmly believes that Cineworld offer employees a good zero hours contract, as the company allows them to work other jobs in conjunction with their position at the cinema chain. This is opposed to the zero hours contracts utilised by Buckingham Palace this summer, whereby any workers were not allowed to seek alternate employment to top up their income without official permission from palace representatives.
Yet critics are sceptical of this claim, especially given Cineworld’s recent run of financial successes. In the six months to June, pre-tax profits climbed 24 per cent to £16.5 million, with sales boosted by 21.9 per cent to £201.6 million.
Surely, then, Cineworld can afford to take on more full-time employees?
Not according to Mr Wiener. He claims that the use of zero hours contracts makes little difference to the bottom line, but that they allow employees to utilise their working hours more efficiently.
He continues; “There’s still a risk to us.
“The savings on employees is meaningful but not enough to offset poor sales or quiet periods.
“I know zero hours is a dirty word but it allows us to employ as many people as possible.”
With unions continuing to rally against employers using zero hours contracts, and businesses equally convinced that their hiring methods allow their companies to run more efficiently, it appears that this is a debate set to go on for some time. However, with the government now looking into the matter as a primary concern, it could be that chains such as Cineworld will be forced to change their ways in the near future.
Do you think zero hours contracts are beneficial for the employment rate, or do they simply aid in the masking of issues such as underemployment?
Previous Post
Pub Closures Affect Communities Around the Country
