Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A British Plumber May Show Uber the Future of Employment (bloomberg.com)

Posted by msmash on from the setting-the-stage dept.

A British plumber may show Uber the future of employment. From a report: The U.K.'s top judges ruled Wednesday that Pimlico Plumbers Ltd. should've treated one of its tradesman as a "worker," giving him the right to vacation pay and to sue the company in a decision that could have ramifications for other gig economy lawsuits. Supreme Court judges found that plumber Gary Smith, who worked for London-based Pimlico Plumbers between August 2005 and April 2011, wasn't self-employed or a client of the firm, giving him the right to sue the company under discrimination laws.

"This is one of the most significant employment status decisions we have seen in the last five years," said James Murray, an employment lawyer at Kingsley Napley in London. Uber and other app-based firms will be watching the ruling with interest as they face similar legal challenges over the way they treat employees. Uber's appeal of a decision granting its drivers benefits including overtime and paid vacation is scheduled to be heard by another court October 30. Meanwhile Deliveroo, the food-delivery service, is currently battling the IWGB union over its riders' employment status and in May, taxi service Addison Lee lost an appeal over whether drivers were independent contractors or employees with rights to benefits.

5 of 98 comments (clear)

  1. So what about his National Insurance? by MancunianMaskMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If he wasn't self employed, he should have payed a higher rate of NI (for all you non-UK people: in the UK, income tax is split in a weird way into 2 pieces: i) income tax and ii) Natonal Insurance (NI). NI is not payed by pensioners, and a lower rate applies to the self-employed). I wonder if he's due a tax bill.

    1. Re:So what about his National Insurance? by demon+driver · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This being 2018, I could very easily imagine governments demanding something like that, but perhaps as the culprit wasn't the worker but the company it would rather be fair that the company would have to repay him so that his net wages, after paying that tax bill, would equal what he had earned being self-employed?

    2. Re:So what about his National Insurance? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This has been the subject of much debate and law-making in the Netherlands. The issue isn't new, and better believe that someone will pay this tax.


      Not long ago, legistlaters thought the VAR system was needlessly burdensome, and changed it so that self-employed and their clients had to enter into a pre-approved "model agreement". No one understood this system; some large companies (typically the worst offenders such as Deliveroo) got their model agreements stamped, the rest simply stopped hiring freelancers except through payroll companies (who are just highly expensive middlemen). This went on for the better part of 2016, until the new law was suspended. It still is, and they are still debating on where to draw the line between self-employment and employment.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    3. Re:So what about his National Insurance? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ./ ate a paragraph there:

      This has been the subject of much debate and law-making in the Netherlands. The issue isn't new, and better believe that someone will pay this tax.

      In the old days, self-employed people did pay the national insurance tax without actually being covered. Then, the tax was repealed, but if the Revenue Service ruled that your work constitued employment rather than self-employment, you still had to pay (and were retroactively covered). Most freelancers were fine with this as they were in the best position to assess how much of a risk this actually was. But some thought this to be "unfair" and the law shifted the burden to the freelancers' clients. Still not a big deal, clients were ok with this if you could show a VAR, an individual ruling on the nature of your worker status, issued by the Revenue Service.

      Not long ago, legistlaters thought the VAR system was needlessly burdensome, and changed it so that self-employed and their clients had to enter into a pre-approved "model agreement". No one understands this system; some large companies (typically the worst offenders such as Deliveroo) got their model agreements stamped and carried on with the practices that started this whole debate in the first place; the rest more or less completely stopped hiring freelancers except through payroll companies (who are just highly expensive middlemen). This went on for the better part of 2016, until the new law was suspended. It still is, and they are still debating on where to draw the line between self-employment and employment.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  2. Except it probably won't... by overnight_failure · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Depends which lawyers you speak to I guess. How about this opinion from another employment lawyer:

    Alan Lewis, employment partner at law firm Irwin Mitchell said the decision was not a "game changer" and that cases would continue to be argued on their specific facts and, for businesses that rely on self employed contracts, that means further uncertainty.

    "This decision is not necessarily a win for 'gig economy' workers seeking to challenge their employment status."

    Pimlico Plumbers does "not operate a gig model and the implications for Uber, City Sprint, Deliveroo etc may be limited, although the publicity around this case may encourage other 'self employed' contractors to challenge their legal status," added Mr Lewis.

    Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/bus...