I CAN appreciate the nervousness involved with "zero hours" contracts, which were the subject of protest at McDonald's restaurants yesterday.
My personal view is that the most successful people in the world, in terms of business and employment opportunities, are usually those who are indifferent to whatever hours they work in order to further their ambition and credibility. Those who are confident and mean to make their mark on the world in big letters will not care if they arrive at work before anyone else and work later than anyone else. Although nobody is impervious to a possible job loss, these people are usually favoured.
The question is then asked: why should a person have to work harder than what they are contracted in order to survive? This is why unions are in place, to protect workers from unreasonable management expectations.
Zero hours means a business can alter an employee's hours, right down to zero if they want. It's effectively an "on-call" situation. It might suit a student or casual worker, but is somewhat unfair to people who depend on a regular income and would not survive on that kind of uncertainty.
McDonald's were offering a guarantee of 80 per cent of rostered hours. The union found that unpalatable, hence the strikes yesterday.