Deliveroo should focus on improving conditions for its riders rather than snarling at its critics

As riders staged a strike, Deliveroo launched an attack on their union and investigative journalists. It’s squarely on the wrong side of this debate, says James Moore

Deliveroo riders staged a strike as the company pushed back against critics (Getty)

A troubled flotation that saw even the City of London’s hard-headed investors calling Deliveroo out over the treatment of its riders left the company facing a choice. 

It could work to improve their conditions and adapt its business model with that aim in mind. Or it could double down and push back.

Care to guess which of those it opted for, on the day of a riders’ strike organised by the Independent Workers of Great Britain (IWGB) union? 

No prizes if you opted for double down and push back. While some companies are moving to take ESG (environmental, social, governance) issues seriously in response to popular pressure, there’s a substantial corps of corporations that are still reading from the same tired old hymn sheet. 

Deliveroo is among them. “This small self-appointed union does not represent the vast majority of riders who tell us they value the total flexibility they enjoy while working with Deliveroo alongside the ability to earn over £13 an hour,” it snarled in a statement.

Read more:

• Deliveroo riders go on strike as company’s shares begin open trading after disastrous IPO
• Why did Deliveroo shares tank on their stock market debut?

This was issued via Hanbury Strategy, a public relations firm, which I wouldn’t usually name except that its name is included alongside a detailed “background” note designed to put Deliveroo’s side of the story while undermining the company’s critics. 

They include the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which last month published details of an analysis of thousands of invoices from more than 300 riders it had conducted over the past year. This found that one in three made on average less than £8.72, the national minimum wage for those over 25, for their overall time per session in the app. Some made even less: a cyclist in Yorkshire was logged in for 180 hours and was paid the equivalent of £2 per hour

“Misleading,” huffed the note, complaining that it hadn’t been able to look at the invoices quoted. But claims like that tend not to get published without evidence because, lawyers. 

The missive was also leavened it with a bit of old fashioned union bashing. 

“Self-appointed union,” it barked on the subject of the IWGB. 

What does that even mean? “Self-appointed union,” is a contradiction in terms. Unions only exist through members. If they weren’t “appointed” by the latter to represent them they wouldn’t be there. I’d describe characterising the IWGB as “self-appointed” as a cheap shot except that it’s just nonsense. 

There were also details of a rider survey, including claims that the company is viewed as the cuddly and benevolent sun god of the corporate world (OK I’m exaggerating a bit there) with quotes from “Pip”, “Husain”, “Pablo”, and “Jessika” eulogising about riders’  “flexibility” and the wonders of working for Deliveroo. 

Of course, none of those can be verified because, obviously, only their first names are featured. I’m going to treat them with a very large pinch of salt because they’re clearly designed to ram home the company’s key message: we offer riders flexibility to work when they want and they value that. 

Yet Just Eat, which operates in the same space, proved that it is perfectly possible to offer couriers hourly pay, including the minimum wage and basic benefits such as pension contributions, holiday pay, sick pay and maternity or paternity pay. Its people can also continue as “independent contractors” if they want. That sort of flexibility looks a lot more genuine to these eyes.

I’m not holding up Just Eat as the operator of a workers’ utopia here. But it’s worth noting the opinion of Matthew Taylor, author of the Taylor Report into the gig economy, on the move. He said it looked like “a fundamental and very welcome shift in the business model of Just Eat and one that I hope others will follow”. 

Those hopes have sadly gone unrealised in the case of Deliveroo. 

Henry Chango-Lopez, IWGB general secretary, described Deliveroo’s business model as “Dickensian” and said it was in the public interest to get it changed. . 

It’s also in the interests of Deliveroo’s shareholders. It doesn’t matter how many consultants the company uses their money to hire, the protests aren’t going to stop until its riders are offered a better deal. Until that time, Deliveroo is going to remain under a cloud.

Boss Will Shu could blow it away tomorrow if he wanted to. He should do so.