Kingfisher

Of course, you'll get the odd example of how it works for some, but the downside is all too great a price to pay. Most of aren't in a position where they can pick or choose how many hours they want. Oh I don't think I'll work this week, I wish!! Most zero hour contracts are for low pay jobs.

Would a say, 10 hour contract not do the job? The only thing the hospital have to do is guarantee her her 10 hours. The only thing she has to do is work those 10 hours. Is that unworkable? Edit- I see your point more clearly now. They need to bring qualified staff in for perhaps a day or a week. Within the NHS are there no qualified staff available to cover from other depts?

No theirs is to ban zh contracts. The NHS is 66 on the 5th. It's a shame that the last 30+ years of government have been intent on destroying the envy of the world. Without treatment, my prognosis is grim. We need to stop our politicians selling of our health to profiteering businessmen.

Ok, I propose if we all got paid in magic beans and planted them that we'd all live happily ever after, but as we're not let's see if we can find an alternative to zero hour contracts without going into fairy tales about basic incomes.

I have a great deal of sympathy for your view on the imbalance of power relationships in the labour market but the above is just a number of segues from soundbite to soundbite.Ive not heard an alternative to a blanket ban, other than, 'it's fine - keep the status quo'. I'd like to hear a scenario where a zero hour contract is so unavoidable and vital to the greater good that it justifies the continued and potential exploitation of increasing numbers of workers.

Exactly. A modicum of foresight and planning trumps an exploited workforce. Therefore no need for a fudge, a total ban on zero hours should be brought in, no real losers, plenty to gain.

As I said, it's an attempt to analyse things in a constructive and objective manner, rather than wittering on about how unfair life is, with nothing but anecdotal evidence to back that up. An attempt, a very poor attempt. Questions like, we asked employers why they use zero hour contracts, none said to exploit workforce and maximise profit - insightful. The growth in contracts that can be and are used to exploit is worrying. There is no need for them, ban them.

That's a very rosy slant put on zero hours contracts there by the CIPD. A situation that will leave you with less job security, lower wages, no guarantee of work and less workers rights. Zero hour contracts are increasing, in a time when job security is decreasing, pay is decreasing and workers rights are decreasing.

In the hotels and restaurants sector, 19% of all workplaces (up from 4% in 2004). In the health sector, 13% (up from 7%). In the education sector, 10% (up from 1%) Zero hour contracts, (the fabulous McDonald's model of employment) may be coming your way soon. But it's for your own good. Vote Tory.

There we go, empowering the worker will cost jobs... Same old scare stories. 'Oh no you can't earn enough to live on, it will cost jobs!' 'Oh no you can't have a secure set of hours and a bit more job security, it will cost jobs'. Businessmen working for businessmen not the people. It's a shame some are falling for that bullshit.

No, always been a problem. They don't offer job security or protection, especially when times are hard. The normalisation of them is a worry, they're becoming more common. Correct a wrong, ban them now.

Of course it's a small minority. If hundreds of people are applying for McDonalds jobs as the 'lucky one' who gets the job you're gonna have zero protection from a zero hour contract and your boss is left free to make your life miserable. That's the reality of zero hours contracts for 99% of people who need regular full time work.

Exactly, which is why zero hours contracts should be banned. Too much power to the employer.

May was the hottest on earth since records began. We know temperature and CO2 levels are linked. We know a warmer atmosphere has more energy, we know an atmosphere with more energy leads to more extreme weather events. We know extreme weather events kill in poor countries and cause heavy disruption in rich countries. So why has Cameron backed CO2 producing fracking? Why has Cameron reduced insulation grants? The solutions aren't easy, the right thing to do isn't easy - this government are failing on both counts.

BBC would have been down there like a shot if the police had provoked a minor scuffle, with the headline 'rioting breaks out in London'. Running the same scuffle on loop for 2 days. It was very well organised, and everybody behaved brilliantly by all accounts. Well done to all that made it there and all who spoke. The real story is the 50,000 ordinary folk getting together in harmony to give the government a message, and how the media have ignored it. The peoples assembly's 50k isn't even as much as the 200k that unison can gather. The feeling out there is growing and the media cannot ignore us forever.