Zero-hours contracts: What are they as research shows an increase in over-50s on them?
An analysis of official figures by campaign group Rest Less found that the total number had increased from 190,000 a decade ago.
It said people aged 50 or over make up 26% of the entire zero-hour contract workforce. Combined, the under-25s and over-50s make up 66% of the total zero-hour contracts workforce, it added.
Stuart Lewis, chief executive of Rest Less, said: 'Ahead of significant proposed changes to the structure of zero-hours contracts, our analysis paints a picture of the growing prevalence of insecure work amongst older workers.
'The fact that we've seen a 58% increase in over-50s on zero-hour contracts over the past decade reflects both the changing nature of work and the increasing pressure on older workers to accept less secure employment arrangements.
'We know that for some, zero-hour contracts can offer highly flexible working arrangements that enable people to fit work around other life commitments. For others, they are the only option available to older workers who can find themselves shut out of standard employment opportunities due to age discrimination."
He said they were concerned that some older workers currently on zero-hours contracts could be at risk of unintended consequences from the policy change, adding: 'We are concerned that some employers will stop offering zero-hours contracts entirely which could make it more difficult for older workers to find flexible work in the future, potentially forcing them into other shadow employment arrangements with even less protection.'
The government website says: "Zero-hours contracts are also known as casual contracts. Zero-hours contracts are usually for 'piece work' or 'on call' work, for example for interpreters."
It adds that this means workers are "on call when you need them", that you "do not have to give them work", and that they "do not have to do work when asked".
The Acas website says zero-hours contracts can be: "a flexible option for both employers and workers", adding, "For example, if the work is not constant or is 'as and when'."
The general understanding is that an employer doesn't have to provide minimum working hours, but equally the employee doesn't have to take work offered if they don't want to.
Acas gives examples as bank work in the NHS, care work, delivery driving, gig economy work, hospitality work and warehouse work.
Zero-hours workers are entitled to statutory annual leave and the National Minimum Wage in the same way as regular workers, the government website says.
Employers can't stop an zero-hours worker from getting work elsewhere, and workers can ignore a clause in their contract if it bans them from looking for work or accepting work from another employer.
Campaigners are concerned that zero-hours contracts offer little job security or guaranteed income, predictable income, leading to difficulty accessing benefits and other impacts on the worker's personal life.
The system is thought by many to create a power imbalance, with workers feeling pressured to accept shifts amid fear of losing them in the future, and the potential for employers to exploit workers.
The government's Employment Rights Bill proposes changes to zero-hours contracts that are hoped to make them fairer, including guaranteed hours, notice perios and compensation if shifts are cancelled or changed at short notice.
The bill was published in October 2024 but may not come into effect until 2026 or later.
In the wake of the report from Rest Less, a Bus and Trade Department spokesperson said: 'Our Employment Rights Bill will ensure workers can have flexibility that suits them as well as their employer by giving people the right to a guaranteed hours contract. Those who want to remain on their current arrangement can do so.
'These measures are not about restricting choice, they are seeking to end exploitative zero-hour contracts. We are committed to ending one-sided flexibility to ensure workers who want to have more predictability are able to.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Yahoo
Could an outright ban on zero-hours contracts harm working mums?
Since the Labour government came into power in the summer of 2024, ministers have pledged to crackdown on 'exploitative' zero-hours contracts as part of changes to the employment bill. Under the new rules proposed, employers will have to offer workers a contract that guarantees a minimum number of hours every week – a change many see as a significant step forward for job security. More than one million people in the UK are working on a zero-hours contract basis, in areas ranging from hospitality and warehouses to the NHS. Women are disproportionately affected by the precarious nature of zero-hours work, which contributes to the gender pay gap. Read more: Why did shared parental leave fail in the UK? According to the Trades Union Congress, women are 34% more likely than men to be on such contracts, and they earn nearly £10 less an hour than men who aren't on them. However, some argue that an outright ban, without tackling the growing shortage of flexible jobs, won't truly level the playing field for women and working mothers. Chronic lack of flexible work In a push to pre-pandemic flexible working arrangements, almost half of all businesses across the UK now want staff back in the office on a full-time basis, a British Chambers of Commerce survey of more than 500 businesses found. At the same time, more than a million UK workers have quit their jobs in the past year because of a lack of flexibility. This U-turn is hitting mothers hard, with one in four forced to leave the workforce because it's impossible to work and care for children without adequate flexibility. 'An outright ban on zero‑hours contracts could indeed harm working mothers, but not for the reasons you'd expect,' says Elizabeth Willets, founder of the recruitment firm Investing in Women. 'The issue isn't that women choose precarious work. It's that our labour market offers so few truly flexible, professional-level roles – and zero‑hours contracts often become the only way to combine work and caregiving.' Women aren't taking on zero-hours roles by choice. For many, there is no quality flexible or part-time equivalent. According to the 2023 Flexible Jobs Index by Timewise, the number of jobs advertised as flexible has plateaued. Only 31% overtly offer it – which is a negligible change from 30% in 2022. 'It leaves women balancing insecurity against inflexibility as their only options,' says Willets. Women need enough to live and plan on That being said, there's a need to balance flexibility with financial stability. For those without guaranteed hours, it's hard to anticipate income and schedule childcare in advance, says Rachel Carell, founder and CEO of childcare organisation Koru Kids. 'We've worked with many working mums as freelancers doing things like marketing and design – but rarely on zero hours,' she says. 'I've heard again and again that flexibility is vital, but so is the ability to plan and earn enough to live on. Zero-hours contracts rarely offer that.' Read more: What to expect from a maternity discrimination employment tribunal About 80% of zero-hours contract workers want regular hours, with 75% reporting financial hardship due to insufficient hours. And, these contracts can sometimes limit flexibility too. According to TUC research, two-thirds (67%) of mothers on zero-hours contracts have difficulty managing work with childcare – and two-thirds have missed out on a planned family event because of needing to work. When Carell launched the business, most of the nannies were on zero-hours contracts. 'But we moved away from these contracts voluntarily, because we heard from Koru Kids nannies that they didn't provide the security the nannies needed. We worked with parents to design new contracts that still gave flexibility, but also offered predictable hours and income,' she explains. Finding a flexible middle ground Clearly, change is needed – but simply banning zero-hours contracts may not be the solution. What could be done to keep those who rely on flexibility in the workforce, without forcing them to sacrifice their income? 'Countries like New Zealand, Germany and Ireland have shown ways to regulate zero-hours use while preserving flexibility,' says Willets. In 2016, New Zealand banned the insecurity of zero-hours contracts, not the adaptability. Employers still get to increase hours when needed, but workers start from a guaranteed base, are compensated for standby time and can decline extra work without fear of losing future shifts. 'Short-term reforms could also include guaranteed minimum hours after six months, notice periods for shift changes and pension contributions from day one, regardless of earning thresholds,' adds Willets. 'In the long-term? The real fix lies in businesses offering genuine alternatives like quality job shares, part-time roles aligned with professional pay scales, term-time contracts that don't penalise women and flexible working from day one.' Offering quality part-time work in senior roles would no doubt help to narrow the gender pay gap, which widens at higher salary levels. Below salaries of £20,000, 22% of job adverts offer part-time work, but this almost halves to 12% at the £20k point. And, it reduces to just 6% amongst jobs paid more than £60,000 a year. Improving access to promotions for part-time workers is also key. Michelle Chikanda, who founded the leadership firm Legacy Never Dies to work around her 2-year old son, adds that a ban on zero-hours could lead to more permanent and consistent work being available, if the government aids businesses. 'A ban must be matched with tax incentives for businesses that reduce the cost of hiring certain groups of people, like working mothers, creating a sustainable solution for all parties,' she says. Ultimately, the goal should be to replace zero-hours contracts with stable, flexible roles that don't force women into choosing between work, stability and their families. 'That's how we build real equity,' says Willets. 'Not with one-size-fits-all reform, but with thoughtful change grounded in lived reality.' Read more: How to speak to your boss about miscarriage How to stay motivated during a long job hunt Does mental health first aid work?Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Forbes
08-08-2025
- Forbes
The New Startup Category VCs Are Excited About
We are on the cusp of a profound demographic shift. In 1950, there were only 14,000 centenarians. Today, it's nearly 750,000. By 2054, this figure is projected to reach almost four million. Living to 100 is swiftly becoming the new normal. Healthcare systems aren't ready for this demographic tsunami. They were built for a different era, when life expectancy was much, much lower. (This is why, incidentally, older age care isn't covered by the NHS remit - the founders of the health service simply didn't believe there was a great enough need). We're entering a new era. One that necessitates a completely fresh approach to health, wellbeing and longevity. And the solutions that can step in to solve this challenge are getting VCs excited. We're calling this new startup vertical - where deep-tech, healthcare and AI meet - 'bio-infrastructure'. Whilst recent years have brought a range of new therapies and smart gadgets aimed at helping us live healthier lives, these innovations won't help us cope with the upcoming demographic challenges at scale without a fundamental overhaul of the underlying systems in which they operate. Markets across the world need new infrastructure that allows for a seamless interplay of data, tooling, physical equipment, and health delivery. Think predictive AI that can optimise clinical trials by matching drugs to the right patient cohorts based on genetics. Or cloud platforms that allow scientists to run experiments without needing their own physical labs. Bio-infrastructure startups are stepping up to fix these foundations and make them fit for the future. Founders in this space are building at the intersection of healthcare, deep-tech, infrastructure, and artificial intelligence. Looking not just at software, but how it interacts with the physical elements of healthcare: the labs, clinics, servers, factories, and workforce that make systems like the NHS function. These companies don't fit into traditional boxes like "drug developer" or "software business"; they are collectively building the layer of intelligence that will power the health system of tomorrow. VCs like me are paying increasing attention to this space, especially the startups building across these five bioinfrastructure pillars. There is a huge space to build a category defining company that can boost lab productivity by leveraging agentic AI and advanced automation. My prediction here is that labs will become increasingly sophisticated and autonomous, accelerating R&D and empowering nations with limited resources to build their own biotech capabilities. The next generation of pharma giants could come from this group; companies that start with a technical or process advantage and use it to build their own drug pipelines. Companies like Micrographia Bio (an Ada Ventures portfolio company) and Benchling are some of the exciting first movers already breaking through in this space. The clinical trial process is stuck in the past. But modern software can change that. I'm excited about companies that are using predictive analytics to match drug trials to the right cohorts, shorten recruitment times, and fine-tune supply chains. The ultimate goal? The "n-of-1" clinical trial, where treatment is personalised based on an individual's unique genetic and disease dynamics. I believe that the next blockbuster therapy will come to market because of operational innovation like this, powered by startups like (an Ada portfolio company) or Owkin. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the fragility of global medical supply chains - making it clear that strategic autonomy in biotechnology is a national imperative. As a VC, I'm looking to invest in platforms that empower domestic biomanufacturing capabilities. That might be cloud biology platforms that democratise access to compute, or specialised facilities for producing cell and gene therapies. BitBio and Nuclera are great examples of this type of bio-manufacturing innovation in action. The VC bet here is that, just as cloud democratised access to computing power, bio-manufacturing infrastructure will democratise access to life-saving therapeutics. Never the sexiest area, but regulation-focused startups have a huge part to play in the bioinfrastructure revolution. My eyes are currently peeled for tools that use agentic AI to standardise regulatory filings and API-first companies that embed privacy, security, and consent compliance directly into devices and care delivery. Companies that simplify or automate regulatory burdens such as FDA submissions and HIPAA compliance - like Keragon, Freshpaint or healthverity - can allow biotech companies to focus on discovery instead of paperwork. I predict that the next wave of digital health platforms will make regulation and compliance almost invisible. Healthcare can't scale without people, but the way we find, train, and retain workers is broken. We need more platforms that can bring the speed of the gig economy to healthcare while upholding the highest standards of verification and onboarding. At Ada, we're backing credentialing platforms, marketplaces that match healthcare workers with flexible shifts, and AI copilots that reduce cognitive load for nurses and caregivers. Existing examples of leaders in this field include Cera, Axuall and Ambience. The bet is simple: the next billion-dollar workforce platform won't be for coders - it'll be for caregivers. The bio-infrastructure bets we make now will define this new age of longer lifespans, and it's exciting to see so many founders already taking on the challenges of tomorrow. With age comes wisdom, and if we're living to 100, we have a lot to look forward to. But for VCs like me, the wisest choice right now is to back the startups making healthcare systems more proactive, preventative, and fair – for everyone.
Yahoo
06-08-2025
- Yahoo
NHS wheelchair supplier for York and North Yorkshire in liquidation
The healthcare supplier which provides NHS wheelchairs in York and North Yorkshire has entered liquidation. Nottingham Rehab Limited, which trades as NRS Healthcare, is being wound up after a court appointed the official receiver, Gareth Jonathan Allen, as liquidator on Friday (August 1). The NHS Humber and North Yorkshire Integrated Care Board (ICB) has a contract with NRS Healthcare to provide wheelchair services in York and North Yorkshire. An NHS Humber and North Yorkshire Integrated Care Board spokesperson told The Press: 'Wheelchair service users in York and North Yorkshire should continue to contact NRS in the usual way." The official receiver will help transfer the wheelchair services to a new provider once its new contract arrangements are in place with the ICB. It is understood that discussions between the ICB and alternative providers are ongoing. Following an application made by Mr Allen, the court appointed Mark James Tobias Banfield, Edward Williams, Helen Laura Wheeler-Jones, Adam Seres and David James Kelly of PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) as special managers of the companies. The special managers have been appointed to assist the official receiver with the liquidations. Mr Allen will wind-up the companies in accordance with his statutory duties, the Insolvency Service said. 'He also has a duty to investigate the cause of each company's failure and the conduct of current and former directors,' it added. PwC, a London-based professional services firm, said Nottingham Rehab Limited and NRS Healthcare had been 'unable to achieve a restructuring and as a result, both have been placed into liquidation'. The PwC website states that Nottingham Rehab Limited and NRS Healthcare had been 'facing a number of difficulties over the last few months', adding: 'Unfortunately, NRL [Nottingham Rehab Limited] and NRS have been unable to achieve a viable solution to save the business.' It said company employees 'still have a job' and 'will be paid for work done'. 'In the meantime we are reviewing next steps and we will communicate on these as soon as we are able,' the PwC website states. 'The message is that you should continue to turn up to your normal place of work and continue to take instructions from your line manager unless you are told otherwise.' Read next: Coroner tells York and Scarborough NHS trust to act after patient's death 'His work touched so many lives' - tributes to Covid-19 envoy with York links North Yorkshire care home put in special measures as residents at 'risk of harm' Nottingham Rehab Limited's annual accounts filed on Companies House and dated March 31 last year reported an operating loss of £5.6 million in the relevant period. The company's directors, however, were 'satisfied with the results for the period', according to the accounts. A government spokesperson said: 'We are working closely with local authorities to keep patients safe, ensure continuity of care and minimise disruption as alternative arrangements are finalised. 'This includes working closely with the Insolvency Service to allow NRS Healthcare to continue trading for a limited period to ensure a smooth transition.' The Press has contacted NRS Healthcare for comment.
