Extension of Master’s Power Within the Framework of the Zero-Hours Labour Contract: Problem Statement

Abstract

The article is devoted to the refraction of the phenomenon of the employer’s master’s power in the system of relations between the parties to the zero-hours contract. The objectives of the work: to show the traditional limitations of such power and their extension in the zero-hours contract. On the basis of the analysis of foreign legislation and European judicial practice the definition of the zero-hours contract is given. Conclusions are drawn that the contract with non-fixed working hours refers to atypical employment, and, as a rule, is considered as a labour, not civil law contract. A different enforcement position is also reflected in the article. The conclusions on the issue of the sectoral affiliation of such an agreement are important for highlighting the legal status of an employee working under a zero-hours contract and the employer’s control not only in the course of labour activity, but also outside it. Such a non-standard situation for labour law is due, as the author notes, to the flexible, unpredictable, non-fixed work schedule. This peculiarity is the one around which the very concept of a zero-hours contract was formed. It is revealed that the employer’s ability to change the working hours of employees may act as a latent measure of quasi-disciplinary action unknown to labour law. It is concluded that such discretionary power of the employer increases the level of subordination of the employee with unfixed working hours and strengthens the personal dependence of the latter. It is noted that digitalisation, as a condition that allows the extension of such control by changing the working schedule in real time, exacerbates the unstable nature of the atypical relationship in question. It is found that the extension of master’s power disrupts the work-life balance, which is usually pointed out as an advantage of opting for a zero-hours contract for the worker. It is concluded that the normative construction of such a contract should be based on the principle of compensation for both work and the waiting period for work, and provide for minimum compensation for restrictions on workers’ rights.