It seems the above have been in existance in some workplaces in this country for many years. Yet it has taken publicity in the UK media to highlight the situation here. Why?
It seems the above have been in existance in some workplaces in this country for many years. Yet it has taken publicity in the UK media to highlight the situation here. Why?
I still don't get what the benefits of zero-hour contracts are to the victims (apparently they are called "employees"). Listening in to the debate in the UK they seem to say flexibility, but that doesn't seem to add up, any flexibility seems to be weighted in favour of the employer not the employee. Is it simply a case of no other options? In which case is is not in effect duress?