Junior8 Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 A test case brought by the GMB starting today will decide whether UBER drivers are employees or self-employed. This is not the first time a trade union has got involved in a dispute about workers who are on the surface self-employed - Unite did it in the Billngsgate Porters dispute to the astonishment of many observers - but the decision could, it seems to me, have far reaching implications well outside the sector at issue. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36843386 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerry davies Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 In the world of legal eagles and precedents it is still early days on the Agency Worker Regulations 2011 which has knock-on effects on all "casual" workers and zero hours contracts. We wait and see. The Hermes case is also interesting but the government has fingers in ears and is going "tra-la-la-la-la" on that one. Far too many "employers", especially in the care industry and service sectors, have been hiding behind the bogus self-employment promoted by IDS as Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. HMRC expanding their investigation into the retail side of Sports Direct is welcome but what is needed are some really hefty fines and possibly a jailing or two to make the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Lewis Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 So...Uber drivers win their case! The ruling accused Uber of "resorting in its documentation to fictions, twisted language and even brand new terminology", adding: "The notion that Uber in London is a mosaic of 30,000 small businesses linked by a common 'platform' is to our mind faintly ridiculous." BBC link.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 I'm surprised, I thought that Uber drivers were more self-employed than other sorts of workers, partly because they decide whether they take jobs or not (though they don't stipulate their rates). Companies that have self-employed people passed off as their own every day, eg doing a set run of courier drops or a Pimlico plumber are surely taking the mickey a lot more. Perhaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart91 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 I'm surprised, I thought that Uber drivers were more self-employed than other sorts of workers, partly because they decide whether they take jobs or not Plus they can work for multiple companies - many take jobs from both Uber and Lyft and can presumably flit between them over the course of a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Lewis Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Plus they can work for multiple companies - many take jobs from both Uber and Lyft and can presumably flit between them over the course of a day. Some forums from ex Uber drivers speak of being dropped or at least warned if they drove from others? I know there are times when such 'employment' arrangements might be convenient and helpful, but just like zero hours contracts there seems to be a move to using them only in the company's interest... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 It's interesting to read the judgement on this - they seem to be saying that the key reasons that uber is an employer is: - The driver works for rates set by uber, and has no way to adjust them. - The driver has no relationship with the passenger before or after the drive, has no way to make contact with the passenger and has no details of who they are. - Uber set all of the terms and conditions for the driver to follow, and can change these at will - Uber imposes what could be inferred as penalties on the driver if they don't follow Uber's rules It is a tricky one as a lot of the drivers love the flexibility that Uber offers, however Uber have so much power that the drivers have little protection if Uber want to exploit them (for example Uber have already increased their "service charge" which the drivers "pay" from 20% to 25% - which will have hit the drivers hard) It does seem that the UK need to develop a new class of "worker" which addresses this style of piecemeal work and ensures that the large companies treat these workers/subcontractors fairly - this fairness will also help to ensure that the large companies don't push the traditional suppliers (such as cab firms) out of business due to being able to operate in an unfair manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jivemaster Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 - The driver works for rates set by uber, and has no way to adjust them. - The driver has no relationship with the passenger before or after the drive, has no way to make contact with the passenger and has no details of who they are. - Uber set all of the terms and conditions for the driver to follow, and can change these at will Into which one could substitute Public Carriage Office and relate the terms to a London Taxi driver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junior8 Posted October 30, 2016 Author Share Posted October 30, 2016 ha- The driver works for rates set by uber, and has no way to adjust them. - The driver has no relationship with the passenger before or after the drive, has no way to make contact with the passenger and has no details of who they are. - Uber set all of the terms and conditions for the driver to follow, and can change these at will Into which one could substitute Public Carriage Office and relate the terms to a London Taxi driver. This might look correct superficially but the PCO is a regulator theoretically democratically accountable not an agency. I agree with Richard though there will be many Uber drivers appalled by this decision and a good number of other classes of 'self-employed' vehicle operators who'll be wondering with some anxiety what happens next. Yet if you look at the definition of self-employment promulgated frequently by amongst others HMRC this judgement seemed to me to be inevitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peza2010 Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 - The driver has no relationship with the passenger before or after the drive, has no way to make contact with the passenger and has no details of who they are. Having been phoned by multple uber drivers I have to disagree with that point. Not that it makes much odds - im not going to give him a ring when I want a taxi! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImagineerTom Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 The Uber app provides a temporary link for drivers to call you (probably routed through uber's servers) and also provides the driver with only your first name purely so they can find you to pick you up. They don't get sent your mobile number nor any other identifiable information by uber outside of the app system so the drivers do not have customer info Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modge Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 The register's coverage of this is very good, in particular it looks at the enforceability of the contract the drivers sign. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/28/uber_drivers_not_selfemployed_london_tribunal_rules/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.