Tribunal rules courier is a ‘worker’; lawyer warns scrapping of tribunal fees could spark rise in similar claims
Addison Lee has become the latest company to lose a legal battle over employment status, after a tribunal ruled one of its cycle couriers was a ‘worker’, not an ‘independent contractor’.
The London Central Employment tribunal yesterday ruled that Christopher Gascoigne should have been entitled to rights such as national minimum wage (NMW) and holiday pay. The amount of holiday pay that Addison Lee – which is best known for its minicab services but also has a number of couriers – owes him will be determined at a later hearing.
“As if we needed any more evidence, [this] judgment once again proves our point. The law is clear and employers in the so-called ‘gig economy’ have been choosing to unlawfully deprive their workers of rights,” said Dr Jason Moyer-Lee, general secretary of the Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain (IWGB), which supported Gascoigne’s case.“Yet another domino has fallen with regard to the inevitable conclusion that people in the so-called ‘gig economy’ are workers.”
According to the Guardian, judge Joanna Wade paid particular attention to how Gascoigne had been given an Addison Lee branded bag and t-shirt, answered to a central controller, and used Addison Lee IT devices, including a system which did not have a ‘decline’ button when it offered him a job.
This is far from the first successful case challenging employment status. Back in January, a tribunal decided that Maggie Dewhurst, a cycle courier for CitySprint, was a ‘worker’ rather than a self-employed freelancer. The case is likely to go before the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) before the end of the year.
In October 2016, a tribunal ruled two Uber drivers had been incorrectly classified as self-employed and should be treated as though they were workers, entitling them to a range of rights. Uber’s appeal against the decision is scheduled to be heard at the end of September.
IWGB also took food delivery company Deliveroo to the Central Arbitration Committee earlier this year to determine its cyclists’ employment status for collective bargaining purposes. The union is now awaiting the judgment.
“Employers should take care and reconsider how they classify those who work for them,” said Shaun Hogan, associate at Stevens & Bolton. “It will become vital to make allowances for holiday pay and compliance with the national minimum wage, especially in light of the recent decision by the Supreme Court that tribunal fees are unlawful. As a result employers may well see a rise in the number of claims lodged by workers in respect of their employment status.”
The latest ruling comes less than a month after the publication of the Taylor Review, which contained several suggestions for changes to how employment status should be determined. These included introducing a mechanism where workers could have their employment status determined without going to tribunal, shifting the burden for proving status onto the company hiring them and placing less emphasis on the substitution test – whether a worker can nominate somebody else to carry out their duties – when determining status.
Meanwhile, a report released in May by the Work and Pensions Select Committee slammed businesses for tricking people into self-employment by telling them it was the only way to maintain a flexible work-life balance.
A spokesperson for Addison Lee said: “We note the tribunal's verdict, which we will carefully review. Addison Lee is disappointed with the ruling as we have always had, and are committed to maintaining, a flexible and fair relationship with cycle couriers. This is a single judgment based on one pushbike courier and the circumstances of his particular relationship with Addison Lee in March 2016."
Related articles
Unemployed should be helped into gig economy, think tank suggests
Researcher says rhetoric surrounding new ways of working is ‘too negative’
Taylor review will ‘further complicate’ employment law
Legal experts brand ‘dependent contractor’ status unclear and unnecessary