Uber defends business model at UK tribunal on worker
rights
Send a link to a friend
[September 27, 2017]
By Costas Pitas
LONDON (Reuters) - Uber told a British
employment appeal tribunal on Wednesday its drivers were self-employed,
not workers entitled to a range of benefits, less than a week after it
heard it would lose its London license.
The U.S. ride-hailing service has faced regulatory and legal setbacks
around the world amid opposition from traditional taxi services and
concern among some regulators. It has been forced to quit several
countries, such as Denmark and Hungary.
Losing its license in London, one of the world’s wealthiest cities, is
one of the U.S. technology firm’s biggest setbacks so far. The London
regulator cited the firm’s approach to reporting serious criminal
offences and background checks on drivers.
It can operate during its appeal, which could last months.
Last year, two drivers successfully argued at a tribunal that Uber
exerted significant control over them to provide an on-demand taxi
service and had responsibilities in terms of workers’ rights.
At the two-day appeal hearing starting on Wednesday, Uber said its
drivers were self-employed and worked the same way as those at
long-established local taxi firms.
The self-employed are entitled to only basic protections such as health
and safety, but workers receive benefits such as the minimum wage, paid
holidays and rest breaks. This would add to Uber’s costs and bureaucracy
across Britain.
"The position of drivers who use the App is materially identical to the
(familiar and long-established) position of self-employed private hire
drivers who operate under the auspices of traditional minicab firms,"
Uber said in its court submission.
Minicabs, or private hire vehicles, sprung up in Britain more than 50
years ago. Minicabs cannot be hailed in the street like traditional
taxis, but can be booked for specific times and places via a registered
office with a call or via the internet.
PROTEST MARCH
Uber’s lawyer Dinah Rose said she would not discuss the firm’s loss of
license except to say: "It’s quite apparent from that decision that Uber
is right to point out to this tribunal the regulatory constraints under
which it operates."
[to top of second column] |
Uber driver Yaseen Aslam arrives at an employment tribunal in
central London, Britain, September 27, 2017. REUTERS/Mary Turner
Around 200 trade union-led protesters marched through central London on
Wednesday against what they called “precarious labor" in the "gig economy",
where people work for various employers at the same time without fixed
contracts.
"All Uber want to do is flood the market with drivers, with no responsibility
nor liability - keep reducing fares to attract more customers, while drivers
carry all the risks," Yaseen Aslam, one of the two drivers involved in the
tribunal claim, told the protest.
Some, however, opposed the decision by London’s regulator to strip Uber of its
license, saying the firm should be allowed to operate but must grant workers’
rights.
In a bid to strengthen itself in Britain, Uber said on Wednesday it was seeking
to appoint a UK chairman, in a newly created non-executive role which it began
recruiting for around six weeks ago.
In a further challenge for Uber, law firm Leigh Day said it would represent a
female driver who says Uber is putting her and other women at risk as drivers do
not know the passenger’s destination until they get in the car, and that could
mean traveling to a remote or unsafe area.
An Uber spokesman said drivers could cancel trips without penalty and did not
have to go to a particular area if they did not want to. He said many women
worked for Uber due to its safety features.
"One of the main reasons why women choose to drive with Uber is because of the
safety features in the app. All trips are GPS tracked and a driver is able to
share a live map of their trip with a friend or loved one,” he said.
(Editing by Andrew Roche)
[© 2017 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2017 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |