Agenda item

The Committee was advised that this item had been referred by Council.

The term “Zero Hour Contract” and other similar descriptors were discussed noting that there is some interchangeability in definitions.  It was explained that a Zero Hour Contract is a flexible contract where an employer does not guarantee set hours of work for an employee.  The employee is contracted to that employer and cannot work for another employer.  It was confirmed that Zero Hours Contracts are not used in Monmouthshire County Council.

In Monmouthshire, it was confirmed that specific contracts are used that are either temporary or permanent for a set number of part time or full time hours.  If an employee is not employed on that basis, they are issued with a Casual Letter and the employee has no obligation to work.  When offered work, the individual can choose whether or not to take up the offer.  This arrangement allows the Council flexibility to employ people on a casual basis e.g. Playscheme workers – typically students looking for summertime employment.

It was explained that the aim is that no employees are treated inappropriately.  It was clarified that some employees have casual hours’ contracts mainly in Leisure Services e.g. Class instructors.  It was explained that managers are expected to review such contracts to see if employees working regular hours should be employed on a part time or permanent basis. 

A Member asked if the Trade Unions were satisfied with the Council’s arrangements.  It was confirmed, in respect of non-guaranteed hours, that specific guidance has been provided (appended to report).  It was explained that part of the guidance suggests that negotiation is undertaken and no issues have been raised thus far.

A Member queried the position of employees working regular hours and their ability to be issued with a temporary or permanent contract.  It was suggested that the information provided in the report was no different to information previously given.  More detail from managers was requested to identify which posts are affected e.g. a 600 hour contract. 

It was noted that County Councillor F. Taylor had written to the Committee with a list of questions and the Member commented that the information in the report did not fully provide answers.  It was explained that, at the time of writing the report, the questions were not available. It was clarified that of the two 600 hours post, only one is current.  The post is based in Tourism, Leisure and Culture and is casual and there is no obligation for the employee to work.  The Member queried if a seasonal, temporary and part time post should be included in this list. The rights of some Teaching Assistants was also queried, raising the question of term time only employees with no pay in school holidays and re-employed for the next term.   The details of the enquiry were noted and a response will be provided regarding the employment practices of schools.

The definition of Zero Hours Contracts was further debated, suggesting that the numbers of casual employees had doubled in recent years and querying if the casualization of workers was due to budget constraints and more information on trends was sought and also employee feedback to reassure that those workers concerned genuinely want such arrangements.

With regards to Leisure, a manager has provided information that most casual employees are students who seek part time casual work to fit in with other commitments.  Other part time employees have other part time work.  If hours become regularised, they are reviewed with the employee to seek their views.  In terms of Home Care, the rural nature of the county is a difficulty and effort is made to ensure employees are employed on the best basis, based around the requirements of the service e.g. minimum guaranteed hours are provided to assist employees with mortgage applications etc. and managers work with HR accordingly.  It was agreed that the Council is not sighted on external agency providers of staff (e.g. home carers) in terms of zero hours contracts.

A Member reported that a constituent had encountered difficulties arranging swimming lessons for her disabled son as there was no instructor available, yet with the flexible arrangements and thirteen instructor on the list it was not possible to accommodate for some services.

A Member queried the inclusion of a Principal Librarian on the list and it was confirmed that the list is being checked for anomalies.  It was commented that the actual figures can vary from day to day e.g. it is sometimes necessary to contact outside contractors to cover absence.

A Member stated that assurance was sought if the Council’s approach is right and appropriate, and expressed his satisfaction that the responses given provided reassurance.  It was queried is comparisons with other authorities was available.  It was confirmed that the other authorities in the region were contacted but only Newport City Council responded.

It was commented that, in order to continue to keep some services operational, casual contracts may be utilised but also reassurance was provided that, where an anomaly is identified, it will be altered e.g. Care workers.

A Member asked a question about supply teachers and if they are directly employed or employed via an agency.  In response, it was confirmed that the Council doesn’t directly employ supply teachers.  It was queried if this could be done “in-house” to avoid wasting money. The need for schools to react, respond and maintain full teaching complements was acknowledged and agreed that this was a topic under consideration nationally. 

The Chair drew the attention of the Committee to the working conditions of agency workers noting that this could represent a reputational issue for Council.  It was confirmed that agencies operate under a national contractual framework and therefore the terms and conditions should be in line with council policy to adequately meet certain conditions of employment.

It was questioned if a review of contracts was possible and also provision of trends.  It was suggested that this would be difficult to commit to due to capacity issues and the amount of time required for such an investigation.  It was reported that there had been no complaints received.                                                                                                                                       

Attention was drawn to the protocol for managers as a statement of policy.  The view of the Committee was that reassurances had been received, the situation at present is satisfactory and that more information would be received in due course. 

It was commented that two Members of the committee attend a national joint employer and trade union seminar twice a year and nothing about Zero Hours Contracts has been raised, similarly nothing has been raised in the Council’s quarterly Joint Advisory Group with unions.

A member pointed out that many people on such contracts would not be union members and wouldn’t be able to afford the fees, and that unions would not necessarily be sighted on the matter.

It was reiterated that union delegates have opportunity to raise questions and no concerns have been registered to date.

It was agreed that the Committee had looked more closely at these issues and more information had been requested.