How does a media-savvy employer ensure a season of festive cheer but without mishap, damage to their reputation or harassment and bullying claims?
There has been a steady trickle, not quite a stream, as this new economy and its raft of rights are forged. We still await any changes following the Taylor Review, the Government is a little distracted at the moment!
- Tribunals and courts are looking beyond what is agreed between parties;
- Personal performance still key; this can be proved by the wording of documentation (Pimlico Plumbers and Mullins v Smith), and demonstrating that safeguarding checks are made against individuals (Addison Lee v Gasgoine);
- Commercial reality wins out; Uber AV v Aslam (on appeal): the drivers across the city were not all small business people as Uber asserted (such as Pimlico Plumbers and Mullins v Smith). Individuals cannot be clients nor customers if using employer branded equipment and vehicles;
The latest case involves the unlucky company of Addison Lee who appeared in an earlier ebriefing – Worker status: A tsunami of gig-economy claims. Mr Gasgoine, in the earlier case, was a cycle courier but Mr Lange, in this latest case, was a private-hire driver and hired liveried cars from a company associated with Addison Lee (Addison Lee v Lange & Ors). The general themes noticed above were again in evidence in the EAT’s judgement.
- The wording of the agreement where the drivers were deemed ‘independent contractors’ was set aside;
- The practicalities of the agreement – the drivers had to log onto a centralised booking system, give reasons they did not accept a booking and could be sanctioned if they didn’t accept bookings – were key to the judgement.
The only case that has bucked this trend and decided that individuals were not workers has been that of Independent Workers Union of Great Britain v RooFoods Ltd (t/a Deliveroo) TUR1/985(2016). This was before the Central Arbitration Committee, so there is a query as to whether it is binding in the Tribunal. That said, the principles are the same when applied.
- Personal performance was not required – substitution was permitted and importantly did occur in practice;
- There were no sanctions if individuals did not pick up a job
There is, we fear, little more to be said at this time as we await the Taylor Review and the judgement from the Court of Appeal in the case of Uber BV v Aslam.
Providers need to be alive to the risk of contractors becoming insolvent and how to limit the resulting inevitable disruption.
Housing associations must continue to deliver core functions effectively and compliantly notwithstanding the uncertainty over the standards to which you will be held in the future.
Over the last few years the meaning of “asset management” has changed from being all about repairs to understanding that assets might not stay in an organisation forever.
The Grenfell Tower tragedy has understandably prompted a fundamental reconsideration of how building safety is approached for High-Rise Residential Buildings.
Results from the latest three-yearly valuation of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) are starting to trickle through.
The potential for Brexit with or without a deal causes uncertainty, and credit rating agencies do not like uncertainty.
Let’s face it, Wills are underappreciated and often overlooked. In fact, around 54% of the British public do not have one!
A recent case throws light on the scope of the exemption for “land transactions” from the need for an OJEU tender process.
A leaked report into maternity services at the Shrewsbury and Telford Hospitals NHS Trust revealed by The Independent has been described as the “largest maternity scandal in NHS history”.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.