Deliveroo urges change in law so it can offer benefits to self employed riders. Does it have a point?
Unions insist that there is more that it can do under the existing framework
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Some good news for those working in the gig economy? Deliveroo, an app which employs a small army of self-employed riders who deliver meals from restaurants to customers’ doors, says it wants to offer them the sort of benefits that those of us with more regular employment contracts receive as of right.
These include sick pay, paid holiday, pensions, the protection afforded by the minimum wage.
In a submission to a Government sponsored review led by Matthew Taylor, Tony Blair’s former policy chief, Deliveroo says it can’t offer these things because the law, as it stands, won’t allow it to. It hasn’t caught up with new ways of working, you see.
Deliveroo says an example of why it needs updating is to take account of the fact that it pays its riders by the job, rather than by the hour. It even suggests a new category of worker should be created for those working in what some would prefer you to call the “on demand economy”.
Unions, however, are unimpressed. The TUC, and the GMB, accuse Deliveroo of special pleading, and argue that there is more that it could do now.
It should, at this point, be noted that Deliveroo has hardly been free from the criticism thrown at gig economy businesses. It is, for example, involved in a tribunal that could determine the status of its workers, and has faced criticism from MPs over the terms in its contracts.
The company might still have a point with its call for new laws that clarify the status of self employed gig economy workers, and take account of the way they operate.
The law needs updating because it clearly has loopholes in it. It is these that have facilitated the rise of companies using lots of self employed workers that sometimes look very much like full time employees, just without their rights.
However, it is easy to see why unions feel that Deliveroo is being disingenuous with its call for this.
Legislation is, after all, rarely accomplished quickly, even at the best of times. These are not the best of times, with the Government already having drastically pruned its legislative programme. The only thing it seems to care about these days is Brexit. Other problems in Britain? They can go hang.
The creation of a new category of employee would also require long, and exhaustive consultations, before even getting to the stage of allocating Parliamentary time to it.
In other words, it could end up being years before Deliveroo and its ilk would have to worry about it, by which time the world will have moved on.
In the meantime, if it really wants to improve the lot of its workers, it should follow the union advice and focus on what it can do now. Plenty, they would argue.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments