Deliveroo is the latest ‘gig economy’ business to have its working practices placed under the spotlight, yet this time the decision has been in favour of the organisation.
Labour law body, the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC), ruled that Deliveroo’s riders are self-employed because they are allowed to substitute someone else to do the work for them.
The case was brought by the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB), which proposed introducing a bargaining unit to cover the area of Camden and Kentish Town, London.
The CAC agreed that the union had demonstrated enough support to introduce a collective bargaining unit. However, it could not introduce one because Deliveroo’s staff were not ‘workers’ and, as such, were not entitled to collective bargaining rights.
IWGB General Secretary, Dr Jason Moyer-Lee,said:‘Despite the CAC’s finding that a majority of the riders in the bargaining unit would likely support union recognition for the IWGB, it seems that after a series of defeats, finally a so-called gig economy company has found a way to game the system.’
‘On the basis of a new contract introduced by Deliveroo’s army of lawyers just weeks before the tribunal hearing, the CAC decided that because a rider can have a mate do a delivery for them, Deliveroo’s low paid workers are not entitled to basic protections.’
Dan Warne, Managing Director for Deliveroo in the UK and Ireland said: ‘This is a victory for all riders who have continuously told us that flexibility is what they value most about working with Deliveroo.’
He added that it wanted the government to change employment law so it could pay its riders injury and sick pay while maintaining flexibility.
This latest decision is in contrast to previous cases surrounding gig economy employment. Last week, taxi-app firm Uber lost its Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) case, which found that its drivers were workers and entitled to employment rights such as the minimum wage.
The main differences between the cases appears to be that Deliveroo riders have more flexibility than Uber’s drivers, who the EAT found were subject to a number of controls including not being able to set their own fares.
The Uber case is now set to continue to the Supreme Court, while IWGB is still considering its next steps – although it seems unlikely that this is the last we’ll hear about the working practices at Deliveroo.
Much like these differing decisions, reward professionals are also split about what employment rights Uber drivers and Deliveroo riders should receive. Employee Benefits’ reader poll found that around 49 per cent believe both company’s workers should have rights such as holiday and the minimum wage, while 28 per cent did not think they should be treated the same and 23 per cent wanted more clarity over the issue.
