This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/business/uk-uber-london.html

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Uber Drivers Aren’t Self Employed, U.K. Tribunal Rules Uber Hit With New Blow in London as Panel Says Drivers Aren’t Self-Employed
(about 4 hours later)
LONDON — Uber suffered another blow on Friday to its operations in its biggest market outside the United States when an employment tribunal in London rejected the company’s argument that its drivers were self employed. LONDON — Uber suffered another setback in its biggest market outside the United States on Friday when an employment tribunal in London rejected the ride-hailing company’s argument that its drivers are self-employed.
The decision, which affirmed a ruling made last year, means that Uber will have to ensure its drivers in Britain are paid a minimum wage and entitled to time off, casting doubt on a common hiring model in the so-called gig economy that relies on workers who do not have a formal contract as permanent employees. The decision, which affirmed a ruling issued last year, means that Uber will have to ensure that its drivers in Britain receive a minimum wage and paid time off. That creates problems for a common hiring model in the so-called gig economy that relies on workers who do not have formal contracts.
Companies argue that such a system increases the flexibility for both workers and employers in the modern economy, but critics say it is exploitative and deprives employees of key benefits like unemployment insurance. Companies argue that using such a model increases flexibility on both sides of the hiring equation, but critics counter that the system is exploitative and deprives employees of important safeguards like unemployment insurance.
The ruling is the second hit to Uber’s business in London in recent months. In September, the city’s transport authority issued a surprising decision to bar the ride-hailing service from operating in the British capital. Uber is appealing that decision, which said the company was not “fit and proper” to operate in the city. It can continue offering its services until a final ruling is made in the case. The ruling on Friday was the second blow to Uber’s business here in recent months. In September, London’s transport authority barred the company from operating in the British capital.
In the case before the employment tribunal on Friday, two Uber drivers, James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam, had challenged the company on behalf of a group of 19 drivers, saying that the service had denied them basic protections by classifying them as self-employed. Uber relied on an argument it has used repeatedly around the world: Its drivers were independent contractors. In the case before the employment tribunal, two men, James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam, had challenged Uber on behalf of a group of 19 drivers, saying that the service had denied them basic protections by classifying them as self-employed. Uber countered with an argument it has used around the world: Its drivers were independent contractors.
“You can hide behind technology, but the laws are there, and they need to be obeyed and respected,” Mr. Aslam, 36, said in an interview. “The impact of this ruling could affect thousands of drivers, and not just drivers but millions of workers across the U.K.” “You can hide behind technology, but the laws are there, and they need to be obeyed and respected,” Mr. Aslam, 36, said in an interview after the tribunal issued its decision. “The impact of this ruling could affect thousands of drivers, and not just drivers but millions of workers across the U.K.”
“It just means we can’t be exploited,” he added.“It just means we can’t be exploited,” he added.
In a statement made after the ruling, Uber’s acting head in Britain, Tom Elvidge, said the company would appeal the decision to the Court of Appeal or to Britain’s Supreme Court. The acting chief of Uber’s British operations, Tom Elvidge, said the company would appeal the decision, either to the Court of Appeal or to Britain’s Supreme Court.
The employment case is one of several challenges facing Uber. Though the service has expanded at a breakneck pace and grown into a behemoth valued at $70 billion, it has grappled allegations that it does not do enough to vet its drivers and revelations that it used software to evade the gaze of the authorities, among other issues. The employment case here is one of several challenges that Uber faces. Although the company has expanded at a breakneck pace and grown into a behemoth valued at $70 billion, it has had to grapple with allegations that it does not do enough to vet its drivers, revelations that it used software to evade the gaze of the authorities and other issues.
Complaints of an aggressive workplace culture forced its founder, Travis Kalanick, to resign this year as chief executive. He was replaced by Dara Khosrowshahi, who has introduced a more conciliatory style. He sought to win over the London transport authorities with a charm offensive last month. Complaints about an aggressive workplace culture forced Travis Kalanick, a founder of the company, to resign as chief executive this year. He was succeeded by the former chief executive of Expedia, Dara Khosrowshahi, who has displayed a more conciliatory style.
Mr. Khosrowshahi’s shift comes at a crucial time. Uber is targeting an initial public offering in 2019, and is working on securiting a multibillion dollar investment from SoftBank, the Japanese conglomerate. As part of his softer approach, Mr. Khosrowshahi went on a charm offensive last month in an effort to win over the London transport authorities. Uber is appealing the London ban, which declared the company not “fit and proper” to operate in the city. Uber was allowed to continue operating in the city until a final ruling was made in the case.
And in an effort to win over customers and drivers concerned about its reputation, the company has introduced new measures and services, like allowing users add tips to their fares. Uber has also promoted its efforts, particularly in Britain, to provide drivers with benefits like access to a pension and insurance. Mr. Khosrowshahi’s shift in tone comes at a crucial time. Uber is aiming for an initial public offering in 2019, and working on securing a multibillion dollar investment from the Japanese conglomerate SoftBank.
The company’s operations in London are crucial to its global expansion. It first began offering its services in the city in 2012, but is now present in dozens of cities nationwide. Some 40,000 people drive for Uber in the British capital, and it claims three million customers have used the app in London at least once in the past three months. As part of its push to win over customers and drivers concerned about Uber’s reputation, the company has introduced new measures and services, including allowing users to add tips to fares. Uber has also promoted its efforts, particularly in Britain, to provide drivers with benefits like access to insurance and pensions.
The arrival of Uber in London has, however, created a clash with the city’s iconic black cabs. The centuries-old taxi system requires its drivers to pass an exacting test known as The Knowledge, where they must memorize around 25,000 streets and 100,000 landmarks. Black cabs are typically far more expensive than Uber’s services, which cabbies complain are too lightly regulated. “Essentially, it has been outrunning employment law and legislators,” said André Spicer, a professor at City University’s Cass Business School in London. “It’s having to become more like a normal company, rather than one that was able to evade existing legal frameworks.”
The challenge over its hiring practices strikes at the heart of Uber’s business model. The company faces a similar challenge in Europe — the region’s highest court is expected to rule by the end of the year in a case over whether the company should be regulated as a taxi service, which would make it subject to rigorous safety and employment rules, or as a digital platform that simply connects independent drivers to passengers. Uber’s operations in London are crucial to its global expansion. The company started operating in the city in 2012, and now offers its services in dozens of cities nationwide. About 40,000 people drive for Uber in the British capital, and the company says that three million customers have used the app in London at least once in the past three months.
Labor experts say that laws in most countries have failed to keep up with the development of technology and the spread of the gig economy. In Britain, for example, the main piece of legislation that regulates how workers are treated was passed in 1996. Uber’s arrival in London has, however, set off a clash with the city’s famous black cabs. Drivers in the centuries-old taxi system must pass an exacting test known as the Knowledge that requires the memorization of around 25,000 streets and 100,000 landmarks. A ride in a black cab is typically far more expensive than using Uber, which cabbies complain is too lightly regulated.
“The legislation is old,” said Susannah Kintish, a partner at the law firm Mishcon de Reya specializing in employment law. “It came out when the Spice Girls had their first hit, it’s just way out of date.” Opponents of Uber argue that it is able to undercut rivals on price largely because of its employment practices, which mean it can avoid paying some of the costs and contributions required by permanent employees. But the company’s business model is facing challenges across Europe. The region’s highest court is expected to rule by year’s end in a case involving whether Uber should be regulated as a taxi service, which would make it subject to rigorous safety and employment rules, or as a digital platform that simply connects independent drivers and passengers.
Labor experts say that laws in most countries have failed to keep pace with advances in technology and the rise of the gig economy. In Britain, for example, the main piece of legislation that regulates how workers are treated was passed in 1996.
“The legislation is old,” said Susannah Kintish, a partner at the law firm Mishcon de Reya who specializes in employment law. “It came out when the Spice Girls had their first hit. It’s just way out of date.”