UBER UPDATE
SUPREME COURT DATE FOR UBER DRIVERS’ TO BE CLASSED AS WORKERS
Uber drivers will have their legal challenge against the company heard at the Supreme Court, it was revealed on 26 May. The online-based taxi transnational has escalated the case to Britain’s highest court to appeal against judgements made in favour of the drivers. Previously Court of Appeal judges upheld the drivers’ case demanding that Uber class them as workers rather than contrac- tors. According to the Morning Star, Uber’s appeal will be heard remotely on July 21 and 22. The subsequent judgement will be crucial: Uber will have no further recourse if judges rule in the drivers’ favour. If successful in their case, the drivers could be entitled to an aver- age of £12,000 each in compensation, according to law firm Leigh Day, representing them. The firm believes tens of thousands of Uber drivers could be eligible to make a claim, but Uber will only be legal- ly required to compensate those who have done so. Lawyers will argue that Uber should provide its drivers with paid holiday and ensure they earn at least the minimum wage. Nigel Mackay, a partner in the employment team at Leigh Day, said: “We believe that it’s clear from the way Uber operates that its drivers should be given workers’ rights. From the amount of control it exerts over them to the ratings system it uses to assess perfor- mance: these circumstances all point to Uber drivers being workers.” Currently Uber does not provide drivers with normal workers’ rights, claiming that they are “partners” to the company. But an employment tribunal in 2016 found that drivers are “workers” rather than self-employed independent contractors. The ruling was upheld by the employment appeal tribunal in November 2017 and the Court of Appeal in December 2018. Howev- er, Uber further appealed to the Supreme Court. If the drivers succeed at the Supreme Court, the case will then return to the employment tribunal, which will decide how much compensation drivers are entitled to. A London-based Uber driver said: “Dealing with Uber can be diffi- cult. They can ban you from driving for them at the drop of a hat and there’s no appeal process. It’s only fair that we have the same rights as any other workers.” More information about the claim can be found at:
www.driversclaim.co.uk
158,000 DRIVERS WILL LOSE WORK IF THEY’RE RECLASSIFIED AS EMPLOYEES
Uber has been crunching data, and it’s come up with an internal analysis on what would happen if it reclassified its California drivers as employees. According to the company, passengers could expect to see prices go up 20% to 120%, and tens of thousands of drivers might be out of work. CNET reports that of Uber’s 209,000 drivers in the state, 76% could lose their jobs on the ride-hailing platform, according to Uber. Rural areas would be hit hardest by these cutbacks.
76
“Shifting to an employment model would force us to limit the number of people who could drive on Uber in order to manage costs that are fixed per employee,” the company said. Most economists agree the system would change if drivers were to become employees. But some say numbers like these need more context. For example, rural areas already have minimal coverage by Uber and some drivers only work a few hours a week. If drivers were employees, the platform would run more effi- ciently, said Michael Reich, co-chair of the Center on Wage and Employment Dynamics at the University of California at Berkeley. “Some drivers who work more than 40 hours per week will reduce their hours,” Reich said. “Many who drive less than 40 hours per week are likely to increase their hours.” Uber’s new analysis comes as the debate over gig worker classifica- tion in California heats up. Currently, most gig economy companies classify their workers as independent contractors, rather than employees. That means the companies aren’t responsible for bene- fits like health insurance, sick leave and minimum wage. California passed a law last autumn mandating that gig workers be classified as employees. The law, AB5, went into effect on 1 January. Instead of making their workers employees, Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Instacart and Postmates spent $110 million to sponsor a ballot mea- sure that could exempt them from AB5. The measure proposes keeping drivers as independent contractors, while adding benefits such as an “earnings guarantee.” The measure recently officially qualified for the November election. The issue is bound to get even more charged as the election nears. Uber’s internal analysis is based on numbers from before the novel coronavirus pandemic hit at the beginning of March. A company spokesman said newer data would likely show even higher prices and more job losses. In its analysis, Uber said rural areas would see higher price increases than cities. Uber said the higher prices would lower rider demand, meaning fewer trips and fewer work opportunities for drivers. Uber’s analysis only takes into account having full-time drivers on the platform working 40-hour work weeks. Uber’s conclusion is less drastic than a recent report by the Berke- ley Research Group, which said 80% to 90% of gig worker jobs would likely be eliminated if independent contractors were reclassi- fied as employees. Reich, who’s authored several reports on gig workers and employ- ment status, is conducting a similar study using California data. He said ride fares would likely increase if drivers become employees, but not by as much as Uber estimates. He believes they’ll rise between 5% and 15%, which would mean passenger demand would fall around 3%. Reich pointed to New York City as an example for what could hap- pen in California if drivers were to become employees. In 2018, New York instituted a minimum wage for drivers and since then drivers have seen higher wages and the city expects the measure will also ease traffic congestion. “Uber and Lyft currently use their drivers inefficiently, as they carry passengers only about half of driver app time,” Reich said. “Under AB5, efficiency would increase, resulting in more pay for drivers, less traffic on the streets and less air pollution. Traffic speeds would increase, making rides for passengers shorter.”
JUNE 2020
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112
