Uber today - RYR/Norwegian tomorrow ?

[JaxofMarlow]

What will be the impact of the UK High Court decision on worker rights in Uber have on the aviation industry ?

[PT6Driver]

When I heard about this that was my exact same thought.

[UAV689]

I hope so!

But no doubt their defence will be the contractors are working for a ltd company and are not self employed....bunch of crooks!

[Willy Miller]

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/28/uber-uk-tribunal-self-employed-status

How would this effect the likes of Ryanair..........?

[MaverickPrime]

"UK’s biggest union, Unite, announced it was setting up a new unit to pursue cases of bogus self-employment."

Wonder if BALPA will do the same?

[Landflap]

Beat me to it Willy. The Uber Taxi driver case will have "Far reaching consequences" for those deemed self employed in a number of industries. Got me thinking of Ryanair and others in our profession who employ under this umbrella. Uber now have to pay the minimum wage, holiday pay etc. Interesting.

[JW411]

I had it in my mind that Ryanair is an Irish airline and that this decision will therefore have little to do with them?

[Landflap]

PT6, yeah, me too. Posted on Rumour & News but beaten there too .Must remember to wind the clocks back too..........falling behind !

[Hotel Tango]

I suspect it might affect UK based personnel. Of course they can close their UK bases but that could be operationally costly.

[anson harris]

operationally costly.

Crippling, I would say. STN is their biggest base.

[UAV689]

I am sure they would weasel their way out of it by claiming that their staff are employed by ltd companies not 'self employed'

[DirtyProp]

In this case those ltd companies are free to propose their services to their direct competitors as well.
Wonder what they'll say about that...

[ShotOne]

Long overdue clampdown; these self-employment contracts are totally bogus with the taxpayer and employee being stiffed in equal measure

[Can737]

hallelujah!

In many countries you can't be self employed if you only have one client and it makes complete sense to me.
BALPA should definitely take the opportunity to clean up the mess, if this can benefit flight instructors, it would be nice as well.

[Chronus]

Willy, this subject was discussed under another thread. Ryanair`s practices of having crews appointed directors and shareholders of limited liability companies contracted to provide piloting services was debated at length. Here in the UK IR35 has been enshrined in legislation and HMRC is already on the case of the various so called service companies. This sort of tax, NIC and employment burden shedding device became very popular especially with our ever booming construction and haulage industry sectors, where every man and his dog became one man companies and took their money out of the company by way of dividends, with the result that no NIC became payable and if the total taxable income in the tax year remained below the higher rate income band, then there was no income tax also. Just 20 % Corporation tax, and who pays that. So it was a great thing for both the work provider and the worker and an easy money machine for the bean counting industry.
For quite some time successive governments concerned with employment/ unemployment stats avoided the thorny issue of challenging these arrangements. It would seem there is now a change in the weather and the tax collectors are being let loose to go after all those employers and workers who subscribe to such arrangements.

Then there was once the hairdressers chair persons. These were in the main gals who rented a chair in the salon and thus were self employed. This may still remain a sound arrangement, who knows, maybe even Ryanair might take a leaf out of the salon`s appointment book and rent the two seats up at the sharp end to Captain and FO and the fold up ones in the back to the cabin crew.

[NEDude]

I was just looking at the how the American IRS determines if you are in fact an employee versus an independent contractor. Among the factors listed that would lead to the determination of being an employee and not an independent contractor:

Behavioral Control-
When and where to work (e.g. Monthly Roster)
What work must be performed by a specified person (e.g. Captain, First Officer duties)
Training for the job

Financial-
Reimbursed expenses (e.g. Per Diem)
Exclusive contract (e.g. cannot do work for another company at the same time)
Regular guaranteed pay rate

Type Of Relationship-
Paid vacations
Sick leave
Disability insurance
The contractors work is presented to customers as its own work (e.g. the pilots are Norwegian Air Shuttle pilots)

I know this is based on the American IRS standards, so obviously they do not apply to the UK, but interesting to note that among the many factors listed, several of them would apply to contract pilots.

[ORAC]

What will be the impact of the UK High Court decision on worker rights in Uber have on the aviation industry ? To be clear - this wasn't the UK High Court - it wasn't even a court, it was an Employment Tribunal, and as such the verdict only applies to the 2 people concerned - will be appealed - and sets no legal precedent for the Courts..


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_tribunal#Reviews_and_appeals

The UK tribunal ruling against Uber is unworkable. Here?s why. ? diginomica (http://diginomica.com/2016/10/31/the-uk-tribunal-ruling-against-uber-is-unworkable-heres-why/)

[JaxofMarlow]

ORAC is quite correct, the Uber hearing was an industrial tribunal and is not setting a precedent. It has however delivered very significant focus on the issue of self employed contracts which by the Inland Revenues definition are clearly not.

[RAT 5]

I am sure they would weasel their way out of it by claiming that their staff are employed by ltd companies not 'self employed'

If I was a director of a legitimate Ltd. company I would negotiate my own contracts. I would then set the T's & C's under which I would provide my services. I would then invoice for those services to my customer. I would not let the customer have dictatorial control over my services and remuneration. I would not work for nothing, including unpaid SBY's or positioning costs & time. I would not pay for any customer demanded training and if required to work in customer demanded clothing would expect the customer to provide them. I would not be paid for holiday, except out of profits from my company, but I would decide when I took holidays. I would be able to work for any customer I chose, as & when. If any extra work was involved, such as an extended day I would invoice for that time. There would also be a compensation cancellation clause if I was on site and the work cancelled. Oh, there would be adjusted rates for night & weekend working.
In other words I would control how my Ltd. company functioned and how it charged it multiple customers.
Surely that is how it happens, isn't it? :confused:

[172_driver]

Excellent post RAT5

[UAV689]

Rat5 wins the award for most comedic value.

[captplaystation]

RAT 5, nail / hammer / head. . . strange how the powers that be throughout Europe have dragged their heels for so long to come to the same conclusion. . . . . . . :hmm: