
DPD courier who was fined for day off to see doctor dies from diabetes - techterrier
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/feb/05/courier-who-was-fined-for-day-off-to-see-doctor-dies-from-diabetes
======
carlmr
>MPs and unions have argued that these strict conditions mean they are bogusly
self-employed and should be treated as employed workers.

This is why I'm happy Germany banned Uber from operating here. I'd love to
have more competition in the taxi market (which is ridiculously expensive
here). But not at the cost of millions of workers.

We need regulation against Bogus self-employment to be enforced. A person who
can only work for one company is not self-employed. At the very least we need
gig economy companies to compete for the labor force to ensure that market
rates go up.

~~~
aianus
I drive for Uber part time and I don't feel the self-employed contractor
classification to be 'bogus' at all.

I use my own equipment, set my own hours, perform tasks with autonomy (I can
choose whatever route I or the rider wants) and have no supervision. I can
also work for Lyft simultaneously if I want.

~~~
tabeth
Can you set your own prices?

~~~
aianus
I can ask, but they won't agree to them or send me any rides.

Is that so different from, say, an unskilled landscaper asking for $50/h and
being passed over for the long line of other landscapers willing to work for
$10/h? I don't think the definition of being self-employed or being a
contractor includes pricing power.

~~~
manicdee
If other Uner drivers are asking $10/h and you are asking $12/h does Uner
still send you fares?

Are you functionally able to set your rates or is this only a theoretical
thing? If you can’t functionally set your rates you aren’t really self-
employed.

~~~
aianus
I can set a limit buy on SPY at $0.01 but it will never be filled. That
doesn't mean my limit orders aren't real or that I'm not _really_ a market
participant.

Likewise I can contact Uber and tell them I want $5/mile and they will say no
and then tell me I can continue to accept rides at the bid or stay home.

Finally I can work for Juno, or by getting my own insurance and coding my own
app, or for Lyft, or a mixture of the above. This is absolutely distinct from
any real employment I've ever had.

~~~
tabeth
I'm not sure if you're being obtuse, but there are no equivalents to a setting
a limit buy on SPY with Uber. You keep on saying "ask Uber", but there is no
mechanism to actually set a price, which makes the rest of your hypothetical
irrelevant.

Furthermore, your examples are pretty dumb -- what if you want to work for
less to have more rides to make it up in volume? You couldn't do that either.
The fact that you cannot set prices means you're not self employed. The fact
that you can set your own hours and use an app is irrelevant.

The fact of the matter is that you cannot dictate your own price using Uber or
Lyft. Uber drivers are employees, and Britain agrees [1].

[1] [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/10/uber-
lose...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/10/uber-loses-appeal-
employment-rights-workers)

~~~
aianus
I am not an employee of Uber. I accept their bids for rides when I want to and
that’s it. I have no commitment or responsibility to them besides that ride
and vice versa.

Also, as noted in your article, regular taxi drivers in the UK have always
been considered self employed contractors despite also having no ability to
change the regulated meter rate. So this whole pricing argument is invalid and
inconsistent with historical interpretations.

Another example is doctors here in Canada who bill out to the government at a
fixed price schedule. Are they not self employed either? After all, they all
bill the same entity and are not allowed to set their own prices.

~~~
tabeth
> I am not an employee of Uber. I accept their bids for rides when I want to
> and that’s it. I have no commitment or responsibility to them besides that
> ride and vice versa.

Yes, you have no commitment to them except following the very stringent rules
and regulations set by them, without exception, when you decide to work for
them.

> So this whole pricing argument is invalid and inconsistent with historical
> interpretations.

Merely being not being able to set your own price is not what makes you an
employee. The distinction is a tax one, concerning benefits among other
things. All "historical interpretations" are ultimately arbitrary like the
very distinction between self-employed vs. employed. In the case of Britain,
their opinion is pretty clear on this in respect to Uber.

> Another example is doctors here in Canada who bill out to the government at
> a fixed price schedule. Are they not self employed either? After all, they
> all bill the same entity and are not allowed to set their own prices.

I know nothing of Canadian doctors to say one way or another. Regardless, the
distinction between being an independent contractor vs. an employee and being
"self employed" or not are two different conversations. You can be legally an
employee and be self employed, e.g. an entrepreneur. You can also be self-
employed yet not be an employee, e.g. an independent contractor.

Uber is attempting to argue that its workers are both self employed and
independent contractors, yet lack the full autonomy that someone in that
position would have, notably, being able to set one's own prices and work
environment.

A hypothetical service where you set your own price and profile, ala eBay +
Thumbtack and are chosen would be the scenario that Uber supposes its drivers
are already in.

\---

This pretty much summarizes it:
[https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4a493c30-578d...](https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4a493c30-578d-4bc7-83d7-96c4d910e5e2)

~~~
aianus
I upvoted you and I appreciate the link.

However, regular taxi drivers in the UK and elsewhere are subject to almost
all the same “suggestive of employee” points and have been uncontroversially
classified as self-employed contractors for decades. Especially if you
consider Uber to be the modern equivalent of a combination of the old system
of taxi regulator, dispatcher, and payment processor. This despite regular
taxi drivers also generally not using their own equipment or having as much
control over their working hours.

For this reason the EAT decision smells like politically motivated bias again
Uber.

~~~
tabeth
> For this reason the EAT decision smells like politically motivated bias
> again Uber.

Heh, no doubt about that. The decision actually had a bit of controversy for
that reason.

------
thisisit
> The company’s system of charging drivers if they cannot cover their round
> has been described as appalling by the chairman of the House of Commons’
> work and pensions committee, Frank Field.

This sounds stupid. Wasn't the whole point of gig economy to setting personal
time, working and getting paid only when the work is done?

~~~
smt88
> _Wasn 't the whole point of gig economy to setting personal time, working
> and getting paid only when the work is done?_

That's the gig companies' marketing, not their intention. The intention was to
get cheap, disposable labor. In the US and other developed countries, an
employee has a lot of rights and an employer has lots of responsibilities, so
under-paying and firing employees is pretty difficult to do.

If a business model only works if you under-pay and mistreat workers, someone
(e.g. Fedex, Uber, US govt, and even Microsoft) will fin a way around it by
misclassifying employees as contractors.

~~~
jdmichal
Firing employees is relatively easy in many US states. At a minimum, all the
"at will" states. Firing people _and not having to play unemployment_ is
difficult, because it requires a legally-relevant cause.

------
mschuster91
I fear that there won't be regulation against the "gig economy" as politicians
are way too bought out by the big companies profiting from it... and as there
will always be someone desperate enough to take even the most rotten, most
underpaid job, even collective action (aka strikes) won't help.

The only thing that will help for sure is, I am afraid, massive amounts of
riots.

~~~
thinkingemote
Riots generally don't help, but I can understand the sentiment if you have
lost all hope in the political system. Beware though, you might be advocating
for murder, property damage, more corruption and misery, in the hope of
alleviating it.

Also be aware that most polical riots do not get organized as riots, rather
they are political demonstrations which turn into riots. Also know that
rioters in the state of rioting are not hoping for something better.

In the same way as a strike is the last resort and an indication that
negotiations in business has failed, so a riot is a failure. Never want one.

~~~
dalbasal
They're not the most reliable or efficient method, but I wouldn't say riots
can't affect any change.

Going back to the 19th-20th century labour movements, rioting sometimes had a
leading role in the creation of labour laws, the ones being skirted here.

But I disagree with the OP. I think better standards will emerge. Some level
of organised political action would probably do it, but I think Uber drivers
and gig-couriers don't identify enough as a group to organise and make
political demands.

What we actually need in most places is better categories for on-demand,
casual and piecemeal work. Employers are often willing to pay a premium for
low commitment employment terms, via 3rd party HR firms/contracts. Put that
money towards regulated protections instead, pension and unemployment
insurance.

Gig arrangements aren't inherently bad, they are just not regulated/legislated
well.

~~~
mschuster91
> Some level of organised political action would probably do it, but I think
> Uber drivers and gig-couriers don't identify enough as a group to organise
> and make political demands.

The problem is: Once the gig workers go to strike, the employing companies
will either cut their hours/parcels/whatever or terminate them outright on the
spot and take the next desperate person into their racket as replacement. And
as long as there is a large enough pool of desperate people willing to do any
kind of job for virtually no pay this race to the bottom will continue.

~~~
dalbasal
There are multiple types of political action that can be taken. One is
industrial action and group bargaining. IMO, this is not the best tool for the
job as most of the gig economy doesn’t exist yet. You need to bargain with
companies that haven’t been founded yet.

Another type is just lobbying/advocacy.

I think the gig-employers (uber etc.) would be pretty happy with clearer
legislation. Costs they would shoulder just fine. They can’t/don’t want to (a)
have to manage their HR via a HR department and (b) deal with anything short
of extreme at-will employment clauses.

IMO (again) there is a ruleset that works for most parties. Define some
categories. (EG piecemeal like uber). The definition needs to include
restrictions, like “employees control their own hours.” You need to ban
certain abusive contracts. Then you need to set aside enough money (more than
regular employees) for things like medical insurance, income protection,
pensions and everything else that gets left out.

I think most employers would gladly spend a little more _money_ if they get to
maintain their flexibility. I think it’s also societally valuable to do this.
(a) Uber is a good case study. They expanded a global workforce much faster
than would be possible under traditional employment. (b) Also, a lot of gigs
are very low barrier to entry, with very little gatekeeping. This helps get
employment to people that otherwise struggle to get it for whatever reason.

This is not an unsolvable problem, even the political 3rd order interests and
horse trading is not _that_ bad. It just hasn’t been done yet because (a) the
gig economy is new (b) a lot of traditional labour advocates are opposed to
its existence and (c) our political systems are not doing too well right now.

------
fian
DPD is wholly owned by La Poste which is 73% owned by the French government.

Seems ironic that a company owned by a government with strong social welfare
and laws preventing long work hours would act in such a hostile way towards
staff in pursuit of profits.

~~~
SideburnsOfDoom
> which is 73% owned by the French government.

As has been remarked, the long-term effect of privatisation in the UK has been
that much of the economy is still government-owned. It's just not the UK
government that owns it any more.

~~~
lozenge
DPD has always been a private company.

~~~
lordfoom
A private company owned by the French Government, no?

------
gaius
_deliver parcels to restricted time slots, must wear a uniform, hire a DPD
liveried van and not work for any other courier company_

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

~~~
rovek
Right. This isn't gig economy, it's a huge company's intentionally abusive
contracts

~~~
gaius
And the sad thing is, I only trust DPD as a company because my local DPD guy
is really good, and since he had the van and the uniform I assumed he was an
employee like he would be with say Fedex.

~~~
smt88
> _I assumed he was an employee like he would be with say Fedex_

Hate to break it to you about Fedex...

[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-fedex-settlement/fedex-
to...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-fedex-settlement/fedex-to-settle-
driver-lawsuits-in-20-states-for-240-million-idUSKCN0Z229Q)

~~~
gaius
I thought that was all settled now? Or maybe I misremembered, I had the
association of “FedEx” and “employee” in my mind...

------
prepend
This is a tragic story for the delivery person.

Obviously, DPD could change to employees and offer sick leave.

But I think the bigger opportunity would be for DPD to add more requirements
on their independent contractors to require that they offer sick leave or
participate in health savings accounts that can cover these types of fines.
The tragedy here is that the company that employed this driver wasn’t able to
pay 150 pounds and instead worked the driver into a grave. I’m not sure if the
company is just the driver himself as a one person company (pretty common in
the US, not sure about UK).

A big risk in contracting is not setting enough aside to pay for benefits and
taxes. In the programming space I’ve ran into people who were happy as well as
stressed out based on how they structured their cash flow management and set
asides for benefits. I had two peers with the same rate ($70/hour x 40/week).
One worked out a salary, set aside IRA, healthcare, taxes, vacation. The other
just paid out the gross amount and was very stressed about company holidays,
vacation and even routine healthcare expenses. It was curious how they
functioned like an employee and didn’t have an advisor to help them structure
their company. We all sat in the same room and were all 30 year old single
people.

~~~
lozenge
Yes, he's a one person company (known as self-employed status in the UK).

Yeah, DPD could raise their requirements (or the government could force them
to) but they would have to raise their prices, and capitalism says they
mustn't do that.

In the UK we've decided nobody should have to choose between seeing a doctor
and paying their rent, hence Statutory Sick Pay. An employer can't fine you
for sickness. Unfortunately DPD found a way around it with some legal fiction.

~~~
prepend
Capitalism doesn’t require not incurring costs for benefits. I’m not sure what
your point is.

Capitalism infers markets with competitors trying to maximize efficiencies.

The US, UPS is the largest and most profitable delivery service. And they have
high benefit payouts and a strong employee union. They have higher costs and
are more profitable than their closest competitor that uses contract labor. I
think it’s overly simple to say capitalism says this is the way it should be.
But it’s certainly not pushing UPS to cut employee benefits, mainly because
employee benefits from-improved by those benefits- are a competitive
advantage.

------
dodge
Please look at guardian or Google holiday pay for contract workers. I'm and ej
court all ruled holiday pay should be given to contract workers after test
case involving double glazing salesman. It is covered by HEALTH in health and
safety. All it needs is someone to take these profit driven companies to
task..hiding behind so called self employment.

------
dodge
Building contractors are paid pro rata holiday pay for duration of a contract.
Gig workers get nothing..its not the work with long hours...its the fact no
one can work without holidays.

------
DoreenMichele
I think the dystopian future we have all been fearing has officially arrived.

Ugh.

