• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Drayton Manor Park

Can you imagine the processes that must have occurred for this job listing to have occurred...

Hiring Manager: "Hiya, we need more Engineers to help us with checks in the morning"

Human Resources: "Does this cost us money"

Hiring Manager: "Umm, yes..."

Human Resources: "Then no."

Hiring Manager: "But we won't be able to operate otherwise"

Human Resources: "Zero Hours, just like any other position, best we can do..."
Click to expand...
 
Funcone said:
Drayton Manor are looking for multi skilled engineers to help maintain the rides who are happy to work on zero hour contracts:

Don't all rush at once.
Click to expand...

I can’t even comprehend how immensely stupid that is

Someone working in that calibre of industry basically FMEA, or nuclear, could be earning £50K+ quite easily.

The idea you’d get anyone on a zero hour contract is for the birds.

If they do please feel free to contact me as i have work available
 
I think there may be more than meets the eye in regards to zero hour contract.

The park were advertising the same role type, fixed hours and full time back in April. They clearly are not short of engineers as they do not struggle to get the whole park ready in time, even on off peak days.

Within the engineering industry these are used commonly to keep certain or skilled engineers on the books without the obligation that neither the engineer or the park have to give them certain hours. It allows engineers to do their normal job, while just helping out if and when needed.

It is clear the park are not using zero hours as their main complement of engineers. They are just augmenting their engineers with extra if and when they are needed.
 
Any zero hours contract is dodgy, sorry.
The benefit is always far greater to the employer than employee.
I'm sure that they also employ full time engineers, by why not offer this job as part time fixed hours, flexible.
That would be far more acceptable to possible employees.
And nothing is "clear" in theme park employment, there always seems to be subtle differences in seasonal work.
Much easier to get rid of "unsuitable" staff at the end of the season.
Keeps pay rates and the unions down so much easier.
 
I would say there is just as many benefits to the individual themselves when it's zero hour and this sort of work.

These are not unskilled workers, they can be highly qualified specialists, there work is in demand everywhere. Especially here in the midlands

Having someone highly skilled on the books, who will undoubtedly be working elsewhere benefits both parties.

There will be no engineers on zero hour contracts only having this as their main employment. That may happen in the low and unskilled segment of the market but it is a VERY different game when you are in the skilled labour market.
 
Sorry, I'm a long way from convinced on the matter.
Not that I have knowledge and experience in engineering, but to suggest that such an arrangement is equally beneficial to both sides is simply wrong.
There is no job security, tenure of post can be stopped at any time, the benefits are far greater for employer than employee, as the employer is paying at their own discretion, the employee is put in a weaker position.
The worker is not in a position to earn as they see fit, but as they are deemed required by management...with limited opportunity to earn overtime at realistic overtime rates, as they are a limited hours employee...extra time is routinely at single rates, not enhanced ones.
All zero hour contracts should be banned, they are a way of employers controlling the employee, however skilled and experienced...wherever they are in the nation.
 
Zero hour contracts are an issue I’m very passionate about and have done quite a lot of research into. It is a problematic area because there’s no agreed definition of a zero hour contract, which sometimes can mean they’re what every a vested interest wants them to be. I know Labour have been talking about banning zero hour contracts using a very obscure definition that they’ve created, but which might not benefit most of the people on them.

It’s generally agreed that the EU has banned them (they banned them pretty much straight after Brexit), as well as many US states and Canadian provinces. But since there are lots of definitions, it’s up for a debate. Some people will argue that banning zero hour contracts should include things like full sick pay (something that some European countries such as Germany already have), but that’s not widely accepted and it’s not generally seen as a core part of banning zero hour contracts.

Often the main thing is that hours get locked in and then there’s additional pay/compensation if they’re changed. For example, you could have a minimum pay law. This would mean that if hours are withdrawn at less than a certain amount of notice (e.g. 7 days) you’d be paid a minimum amount (e.g. 4 hours for every shift cancelled). You’d then also need to have an overtime rate for every shift given at less than a certain amount of notice. E.g. for every shift given at less than 7 days notice you’d get 30% extra.

You could then put in additional requirements, whether that’s a minimum guarantee of hours each week/month or sick pay etc. But if someone can turn up to work and get told, ‘Actually, we’re quiet today, so we’re sending you home without any pay’, then I’d say that’s definitely a zero hour contract.

In many cases banning zero hour contracts only applies to jobs that pay within a certain multiple of the minimum wage. Often double. This would probably mean that it wouldn’t affect supply teachers and certainly wouldn’t affect things like doctors being on call. But if you literally had no roof and applied the ban to jobs paying hundreds of pounds an hour, it might not make sense.

We don’t know how much this job pays, but given that it doesn’t mention the wage in the job advert, I suspect it might not be that high. Realistically, I can't see the park saying to an engineer, 'Just turn up when you feel like working'.
 
Last edited:
Funnily enough, I got a job advert pinged to me today for this sort of skillset. Going rate is still 40k+. The only people I could see agreeing to this would be semi-retired but happy to cover weekends mainly. Plenty of loaded engineers out there. Do they want the hassle though? Probably not.
 
The job advert doesn’t mention the pay, which makes it a little hard to judge. Even if someone’s a skilled engineer, there should be quite a bit of role specific training. It’s not supposed to be a case of a retired engineer who fancies doing a few hours for old time sake rocking up and grabbing a spanner.

There should be a lot of role specific training. There’s a lot of technical standards for theme park rides, such as HSGs, EN standards and ISO standards. Modern rides have some fairly specific safety systems that an engineer from another field might not understand. There’s lot of knowledge about things like inspection schedules, working with inspection bodies, restricted area access, block resets, handover procedures etc. The manufacturers of the rides often specify fairly rigidly how rides should be maintained. IAAPA (the global trade association for theme parks) issues white papers on how engineers should be doing things. Engineers working on a ride should understand something about the maintenance history, accidents/near misses etc.

Maybe I’m reading too much into this, but it doesn’t pass the sniff test.
 
Poisson said:
Funnily enough, I got a job advert pinged to me today for this sort of skillset. Going rate is still 40k+. The only people I could see agreeing to this would be semi-retired but happy to cover weekends mainly. Plenty of loaded engineers out there. Do they want the hassle though? Probably not.
Click to expand...
Seems like the perfect way to get out of taking the wife shopping I suppose....
 
Funcone said:
The job advert doesn’t mention the pay, which makes it a little hard to judge. Even if someone’s a skilled engineer, there should be quite a bit of role specific training. It’s not supposed to be a case of a retired engineer who fancies doing a few hours for old time sake rocking up and grabbing a spanner.

There should be a lot of role specific training. There’s a lot of technical standards for theme park rides, such as HSGs, EN standards and ISO standards. Modern rides have some fairly specific safety systems that an engineer from another field might not understand. There’s lot of knowledge about things like inspection schedules, working with inspection bodies, restricted area access, block resets, handover procedures etc. The manufacturers of the rides often specify fairly rigidly how rides should be maintained. IAAPA (the global trade association for theme parks) issues white papers on how engineers should be doing things. Engineers working on a ride should understand something about the maintenance history, accidents/near misses etc.

Maybe I’m reading too much into this, but it doesn’t pass the sniff test.
Click to expand...

It's a mess yes, but my point about semi-retired or whatever is there is crossovers in standards. I work under ISO9001 certified standards for example and have done previously which in the broadest sense would crossover. The engineers I used to work with in FMCG Warehousing/Conveyors would have some of the correct certification and work with several confined spaces/solo working trained engineers now. I would imagine they're going to expect candidates to need some familiarisation training.

I've done 3 jobs around specifically trained engineers and a lot of them make their money, then decide the idea of a 3 day week sounds appealing. I think this is where DMP are heading for. Will they get someone? Without a salary and a very vagueness and no hours confirmed at all, unlikely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top