Uber drivers are workers, UK supreme court rules

[Sheilbh]

Read Darkest Hour

Mike Leigh's All or Nothing with a young James Corden?

[Admiral Yi]

That's the ticket.

[DGuller]

Do minicab drivers have to pass that ridiculous memorization test as well, or is it only the black cab drivers?

[Sheilbh]

That's just cabbies.

Minicab drivers do have to do some stuff. But their requirements are to speak English enough, be able to use GPS and pass a background check rather than memorise the city

[mongers]

Do minicab drivers have to pass that ridiculous memorization test as well, or is it only the black cab drivers?

Has been demonstrated to alter the brain's activity level/ 'structure' in MRI scans*



* I seem to recall, though I've not taken 'The knowledge' so what do I know. 

[Josquius]

Minicab drivers are horrid with finding their way around.
There's a local company up here who have been expanding heavily. Buying smaller minicab firms in nearby towns....and using the same drivers across them.
I'm sure the incompetence of some of their Asian townie drivers, unable to get you somewhere unless you know its post code, must have counted for a few percent of the brexit vote round our way.

[garbon]

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/sep/28/uber-keeps-london-licence-risk-tfl-safety

Uber to get London licence as court rules it 'no longer poses a risk'

Uber has been granted a further 18-month licence in London after an appeal found it was a "fit and proper" company to run private hire car services.

Westminster magistrates court ruled in favour of Uber almost a year after Transport for London (TfL) refused the ride-hailing firm a licence extension over safety concerns.

The deputy chief magistrate Tan Ikram said he had "sufficient confidence that Uber London Ltd [ULL] no longer poses a risk to public safety ... despite historical failings," after hearing three days of arguments this month.

He said Uber had tightened up review processes to tackle document and insurance fraud and it now "seems to be at the forefront of tackling an industry-wide challenge".

One of TfL's key safety concerns when refusing the licence last November was that up to 14,000 Uber trips had been served by non-licensed drivers fraudulently logging on to the app using other people's IDs.

The judge noted that TfL had since uncovered further areas of concern, including delays by Uber in removing three drivers who committed sexual assaults against passengers.

However, Ikram said: "ULL does not have a perfect record but it has been an improving picture ... I am satisfied that they are doing what a reasonable business in their sector could be expected to do, perhaps even more."

The new 18-month licence will come with 21 conditions, proposed jointly by TfL and Uber, which Uber argues should be a baseline for all similar services in London.

The mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said: "I am pleased that Uber have admitted that their response to very real concerns about passenger safety was inadequate, and since then Uber has made improvements. I can assure Londoners that TfL will continue to closely monitor Uber and will not hesitate to take swift action should they fail to meet the strict standards required to protect passengers."

The ruling is a significant victory for Uber in one its biggest markets worldwide, where it has more than 40,000 drivers and faces challenges from a host of recent competitors.

Jamie Heywood, Uber's regional general manager, said: "This decision is a recognition of Uber's commitment to safety and we will continue to work constructively with TfL. There is nothing more important than the safety of the people who use the Uber app as we work together to keep London moving."

The firm argued that it had fundamentally changed in the three years since TfL first refused it a licence, in September 2017, when the transport company deemed it not "fit or proper" to operate in the capital. On that occasion Uber won a provisional extension on appeal, but it was again refused a licence last November over the identity concerns.

...

[Sheilbh]

So we'll be here again in 18 months if Uber revert to their normal regulation arbitrage model, or they'll start following the rules

[Syt]

They changed the law on cabs/Uber in Austria. Basically, every driver, including Uber drivers has to do the taxi driver exam (existing taxis have till end of next year to redo it, Uber drivers till end of this year). Also, states can choose to set fixed rates like for taxis for Uber, too (originally the law also intended to ensure taxis and Ubers cost the same).

Taxi companies are experimenting with using apps for ordering cabs, too.

[The Brain]

Taxi companies are experimenting with using apps for ordering cabs, too.

That's not standard?

[Syt]

Taxi companies are experimenting with using apps for ordering cabs, too.

That's not standard?

The framework for fares hasn't been extensively overhauled for Vienna (except raising prices) since 1954, so I would say they're a bit behind the times. Though when I call them on my cell they're quick to send me  confirmation via SMS.

[The Brain]

Taxi companies are experimenting with using apps for ordering cabs, too.

That's not standard?

The framework for fares hasn't been extensively overhauled for Vienna (except raising prices) since 1954, so I would say they're a bit behind the times. Though when I call them on my cell they're quick to send me  confirmation via SMS.

Good.

[Josquius]

I may finally get a new TV soon.
Samsung or LG, that is the question.
They do not make it easy even within themselves.

[Grey Fox]

Are there Vizios in Europe? In NA that is the brand where the quality/price is the best, especially when bought at Costco.

[garbon]

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/feb/19/uber-drivers-workers-uk-supreme-court-rules-rights

Uber drivers are workers, UK supreme court rules

The UK supreme court has dismissed Uber's appeal against a landmark employment tribunal ruling that its drivers should be classed as workers with access to the minimum wage and paid holidays.

Six justices handed down a unanimous decision backing the October 2016 employment tribunal ruling that could affect millions of workers in the gig economy.

The supreme court said any attempt by organisations to draft artificial contracts intended to side-step basic protections were void and unenforceable.

Judges criticised the controversial contracts Uber asked their drivers to sign, saying they "can be seen to have as their object precluding a driver from claiming rights conferred on workers by the applicable legislation".

In the judgment, Lord Leggatt said he was not convinced that the contractual arrangements Uber conducted with drivers were compliant with the regulatory regime supervised by Transport for London.

James Farrar, the co-lead claimant and general secretary of the App Drivers and Couriers union, said: "This ruling will fundamentally reorder the gig economy and bring an end to rife exploitation of workers by means of algorithmic and contract trickery. Uber drivers are cruelly sold a false dream of endless flexibility and entrepreneurial freedom.

"The reality has been illegally low pay, dangerously long hours and intense digital surveillance. I am delighted that workers at last have some remedy because of this ruling, but the government must urgently strengthen the law so that gig workers may also have access to sick pay and protection from unfair dismissal."

Frances O'Grady, the general secretary of the TUC, said: "No company is above the law. Uber must play by the rules and stop denying its drivers basic rights at work.

"This ruling is an important win for gig economy workers and for common decency. Sham self-employment exploits people and lets companies dodge paying their fair share of tax."

Uber will not be able to launch further appeals against the ruling.

The case will return to the employment tribunal, which will determine the level of compensation for the workers. Leigh Day, the law firm representing more than 2,000 workers with claims linked to the case, said they could each be due up to £12,000.

Uber has argued that the ruling applies to only a small number of workers involved directly in the case and that it is not obliged to apply its findings to its other drivers.

Jamie Heywood, Uber's regional general manager for northern and eastern Europe, said: "We respect the court's decision which focused on a small number of drivers who used the Uber app in 2016. Since then we have made some significant changes to our business, guided by drivers every step of the way. These include giving even more control over how they earn and providing new protections like free insurance in case of sickness or injury.

"We are committed to doing more and will now consult with every active driver across the UK to understand the changes they want to see."

The case began when two Uber drivers, Farrar and Yaseen Aslam, took Uber to court on behalf of a group of about 20 others who argued they were employed by the San Francisco-based company, rather than working for themselves.

It is one of a string of cases challenging the self-employed status of gig-economy workers, including action against the minicab firm Addison Lee and the delivery groups CitySprint, Excel and eCourier.