There’s been several cases in the last few years reviewing employment status especially in the ever-increasing world of the “gig” economy with cases involving Uber, Deliveroo and recently the Supreme Court Judgement on Pimlico Plumbing.
The latest ruling we have received information on relates to Hermes, the courier business.
The case was brought by the trade union – GMB on behalf of, initially, 65 couriers but the impact could have far wider impact as Hermes has approximately 14,500 couriers in their workforce under the same conditions.
The question for the Employment Tribunal (ET) was on a common theme: are the couriers working for Hermes workers rather than independent contractors; in the case of Hermes the ET agreed they were workers and should be entitled to certain rights and protections such as holiday pay, national minimum wage and possibly auto-enrolment.
The basis of employment status in these cases is based on what control the organisation has over workers. When couriers join Hermes, they sign up to work on delivery rounds and the expectation that they must work six days a week. The ET confirmed this expectation didn’t incorporate the expected flexibility that being an independent contractor would usually include.
Other controls from Hermes were that deliveries should be made in selected time slots, courier performance is tracked and couriers are subject to disciplinary action if their performance does not meet Hermes’ standards. In addition, Hermes decides couriers’ payment terms, generates invoices for couriers, and decides how couriers are paid, and on these grounds the ET confirmed that the control model in place made couriers status that of a “worker” rather than “contractor”.
Michael Newman, partner in the employment team at Leigh Day, who represented the couriers, said: “We are delighted that the Employment Tribunal has found in favour of our clients. This judgement acknowledges that Hermes couriers, as the customer-fronting ‘face of Hermes’, play an integral part in the success of the [organisation]. The judgement confirms that they work for Hermes as part of Hermes’ business.
Some of the couriers have not been paid the national minimum wage and often find it difficult to take holiday. This judgement goes some way to addressing those issues; it ensures that they guaranteed the basic working rights of national minimum wage and paid annual leave. It is yet another example of an employer who has incorrectly classified their workers as self-employed independent contractors and denied them the rights to which they are entitled.”
The areas of employment status and national minimum wage continue to have a high profile in the public domain and it becomes increasingly important that employers understand these areas and the impact they have on their workforce.
The Learn Centre are on hand to assist with their current Employment Status and National Minimum Wage half day course which can be found here:
https://www.learnpayroll.co.uk/
The latest ruling we have received information on relates to Hermes, the courier business.
The case was brought by the trade union – GMB on behalf of, initially, 65 couriers but the impact could have far wider impact as Hermes has approximately 14,500 couriers in their workforce under the same conditions.
The question for the Employment Tribunal (ET) was on a common theme: are the couriers working for Hermes workers rather than independent contractors; in the case of Hermes the ET agreed they were workers and should be entitled to certain rights and protections such as holiday pay, national minimum wage and possibly auto-enrolment.
The basis of employment status in these cases is based on what control the organisation has over workers. When couriers join Hermes, they sign up to work on delivery rounds and the expectation that they must work six days a week. The ET confirmed this expectation didn’t incorporate the expected flexibility that being an independent contractor would usually include.
Other controls from Hermes were that deliveries should be made in selected time slots, courier performance is tracked and couriers are subject to disciplinary action if their performance does not meet Hermes’ standards. In addition, Hermes decides couriers’ payment terms, generates invoices for couriers, and decides how couriers are paid, and on these grounds the ET confirmed that the control model in place made couriers status that of a “worker” rather than “contractor”.
Michael Newman, partner in the employment team at Leigh Day, who represented the couriers, said: “We are delighted that the Employment Tribunal has found in favour of our clients. This judgement acknowledges that Hermes couriers, as the customer-fronting ‘face of Hermes’, play an integral part in the success of the [organisation]. The judgement confirms that they work for Hermes as part of Hermes’ business.
Some of the couriers have not been paid the national minimum wage and often find it difficult to take holiday. This judgement goes some way to addressing those issues; it ensures that they guaranteed the basic working rights of national minimum wage and paid annual leave. It is yet another example of an employer who has incorrectly classified their workers as self-employed independent contractors and denied them the rights to which they are entitled.”
The areas of employment status and national minimum wage continue to have a high profile in the public domain and it becomes increasingly important that employers understand these areas and the impact they have on their workforce.
The Learn Centre are on hand to assist with their current Employment Status and National Minimum Wage half day course which can be found here:
