CIPD research has shown that workers on zero-hours contracts experience better work-life balance and well-being than their counterparts; however, this has pushed for further debate regarding how zero-hours agreements are utilised within a business environment to look at both the upside and downsides of the argument.

The fact remains that less than 18% of employers use zero-hours contracts and are more akin to the hospitality and entertainment industry, giving employees greater flexibility around their lives and personal commitments such as caring for a family member or those struggling with ill health. On the flip-side, employers gain an advantage in pressuring those on zero-hours contracts to ‘take it or leave it offers of shifts and cancel at relatively short notice with little to no repercussions.

The CIPD makes recommendations which include limiting poor employer practice and enhancing the employee rights for those on zero-hours contracts by giving them a more stable work contract after six months of service and creating a code of practice for employers to follow.

These recommendations are slow to pick up traction within the Government. However, a note to employers is to adopt good practice in this area in giving additional consideration to employees before and throughout administering zero-hours contracts.