Ghozer Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 They already were telling them when to work and then penalising them if they refused, this was one of the drivers' arguments. It's a great ruling for the drivers, My Hermes next. Were / are they? I know a few Uber drivers, and they just work as/when they want... they could work 10 hours for 7 days solid, then have 4 or 5 days off if they wish... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shogun Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 Courier exchange are a similar on line site to uber for courier work,you have to pay subscriptions to be on the site they provide you with leeds for work they do checks on your insurance and licence and vehicle you have to be self employed,you have to meet certain standards of work and they are very strict,this is a very similar set up to uber I'm on courier exchange myself so we will watching what happens next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mafya Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 They already were telling them when to work and then penalising them if they refused, this was one of the drivers' arguments. It's a great ruling for the drivers, My Hermes next. City taxis penalise drivers for not wearing uniform, maybe they should also be taken to court... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 I didn`t know that either. I know someone that does private hire, but also logs on to the uber app and does a bit of work that way as and when. I`m not sure how it all works. Some employers bar their workers from working for others, I thought that might be the case with UBER. I guess that is the only way that a person could work part time for UBER; insurance for a part time private hire driver would be high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surveyour Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 Hello. As probably most of us, I have heard a lot in the news about the recent court case involving Uber and two of its drivers. Basically, as I understand, Uner said the drivers where self-employed, but the drivers claimed they where Employees. Drivers won, Uber lost. Anyway, my question is about whether this position would actually extend to all taxi drivers and all taxi operators? For example, I heard Sheffield City Taxi's on Radio 4 afew weeks back (unrelated subject, about greener fuel). And they claimed to have about 1300 "self employed" drivers. As far as I can see, would these drivers not also be classed as Employees under this court ruling? As I guess, same conditions apply, they cannot go and work for another firm at same time, cannot set there own prices etc - basically, they can't do a lot of things a properly "self employed" person can do. If this is the case, are we going to see the entire taxi driving business model reinvented? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharston Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 For example, I heard Sheffield City Taxi's on Radio 4 afew weeks back (unrelated subject, about greener fuel). And they claimed to have about 1300 "self employed" drivers. City Cabs probably operates as a "radio control centre". Individual cabbies purchase from City Cabs the services of a centralised booking system and payments clearence. Passenger pays taxi driver, taxi driver pays City Cabs for use of their coordination service. Uber operates very differently, all the evidence - that Uber gave! - demonstrates that they operate as a private hire fleet, not as a radio control centre. Passengers don't pay the cabbie, they pay Uber and Uber deigns to pass on 40% of that. It's the difference between you hiring a stall in the market to sell your goods, and being employed by a shop to sell their goods. Renting a market stall/taxi radio control doesn't make you an employee of the market/taxi radio controller. Uber are trying to claim they are renting out market stalls, but then they hover around forcing your customers to pay them when your customers buy your goods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Arctor Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 Were / are they? I know a few Uber drivers, and they just work as/when they want... they could work 10 hours for 7 days solid, then have 4 or 5 days off if they wish... At a hearing in July the drivers who were part of the claim contended that they were put under enormous pressure to accept jobs and suffered repercussions if they didn't accept them. The Tribunal presumably saw evidence of this and agreed with them. I think that Uber's problem is that even if they do this to a minority of drivers it still puts them in the role of an employer, albeit one that treats different workers differently. ---------- Post added 31-10-2016 at 22:35 ---------- City taxis penalise drivers for not wearing uniform, maybe they should also be taken to court... Maybe they should. It's always been the case that some employers (construction firms are notorious for it) try to skate round their responsibilities by simply claiming that their staff are self-employed contractors when all the evidence points the other way. Since the recession there has been a big growth in 'self-employment' but it appears it has been masking badly-paid and unregulated employment. Along with zero hours contracts these practices are keeping many people in working poverty so it's very welcome that the tide is turning (some large companies are converting ZHCs to proper contracts, including Wetherspoons). It's also notable that the Trade Unions have shown their continued relevance in new sectors of the economy, hardly the dinosaurs they are often portrayed as. Great work from the GMB on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil752 Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 City taxis penalise drivers for not wearing uniform, maybe they should also be taken to court... why not wear a uniform they can get tax relief for washing their work wear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mafya Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 why not wear a uniform they can get tax relief for washing their work wear Self employed means you are your own boss so how can city force drivers to wear a uniform if the drivers are self employed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil752 Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 Self employed means you are your own boss so how can city force drivers to wear a uniform if the drivers are self employed? i was pointing out there is an up side to a uniform. never drove a taxi do you mean you work for multi taxi companies on the same night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now