Member

Moving on to Lords amendment 1B, why did the Opposition insist on that? It fundamentally mischaracterises the dynamic of the workplace for the majority of those who are on zero hours contracts, as I was for six years in the relatively recent past. Rather than the employer proactively offering a guaranteed hours contract, the amendment would put the obligation on the employee to access and accept. In the lowest-paid and most insecure industries, this would be rife with potential for interference and bad incentives for employees to opt out to convenience the employer. As I have experienced in hospitality and retail, in reference to the working time directive, this was rife throughout the sector, especially when someone was finishing a shift late on and the employer needed somebody in the next day. I cannot see a world in which this situation would not be subject to similar interference from the employer; or worse, with the reference period, the employee will be given fewer hours, especially if they have pre-emptively insisted to their employer that they would access that right.