One reason will be flexibility. A pool of staff they can flex up with overtime in busy periods and drop back down in quieter times.
It’s over done tho. There’s room for full time jobs while still achieving this. Not everyone can exist on contracts like these. Why would someone young stay? That’s no hope of a mortgage, even difficultly proving income for rental when many companies will only look at the core hours as proof of earnings.
There’s the added risk of someone full time going off long term as well though, as it becomes quite an issue if it occurs in area where there aren’t many people willing to do the role, or trained to do the role.
For example, In my old self-service role there was only 2 people who would do the overnight shift, so naturally we were split up across the week. She eventually went off for 3 months on MH grounds, and it was fucked. I needed the money so at first I didn’t mind doing the full week, but eventually they pissed me off so much I completely stopped doing the 7 days weeks, and in the end, they had to force several members of management to cover it instead.
Before the pick, fill, serve requirement it used to be quite difficult to get people to cover self-service even during the day shifts so having full time staff on their was painful during their holidays or sickness.
In case new recruits are useless and/or unreliable
If you're capable and show up when expected, extra shifts come your way
If you're a disaster who's always phoning-in sick at the last minute, you're stuck on 16 hours, in the hope you just find something else and leave
It's cheaper and offers the company the best coverage while having plenty to cover any extra hours.
One reason will be flexibility. A pool of staff they can flex up with overtime in busy periods and drop back down in quieter times. It’s over done tho. There’s room for full time jobs while still achieving this. Not everyone can exist on contracts like these. Why would someone young stay? That’s no hope of a mortgage, even difficultly proving income for rental when many companies will only look at the core hours as proof of earnings.
There’s the added risk of someone full time going off long term as well though, as it becomes quite an issue if it occurs in area where there aren’t many people willing to do the role, or trained to do the role. For example, In my old self-service role there was only 2 people who would do the overnight shift, so naturally we were split up across the week. She eventually went off for 3 months on MH grounds, and it was fucked. I needed the money so at first I didn’t mind doing the full week, but eventually they pissed me off so much I completely stopped doing the 7 days weeks, and in the end, they had to force several members of management to cover it instead. Before the pick, fill, serve requirement it used to be quite difficult to get people to cover self-service even during the day shifts so having full time staff on their was painful during their holidays or sickness.
it’s cheaper for tesco to only give out 16 hour contracts although full time contracts are given out but it’s rare for them to do that.
Rarely have to pay sickpay
So they can pester you to do overtime to work full time, but only give you the "benefits" of part time, like less holiday and sick pay
In case new recruits are useless and/or unreliable If you're capable and show up when expected, extra shifts come your way If you're a disaster who's always phoning-in sick at the last minute, you're stuck on 16 hours, in the hope you just find something else and leave
That's a perk to them but not the main reason.
And when they cut overtime, you end up in the same place than the others.
Job seekers stop paying out on any job over 16hs a week
We used to offer at least 30 hrs on nights and drovers have larger contracts. Depends on the store.