Dutch Ryanair pilot loses court case vs tax man: not deemed self-employed

[172_driver]

What they don't tell you is that what your Company earns

Or they actually do tell you, it's just that new-joiners are too gullible/desperate/uneducated to understand what they're signing.

[172_driver]

I was told that even FR pilots employed directly are on time limited contract which finish age 60 after which you might invited back as a contractor, that has got to be age discrimination if there were truly employed, can anyone confirm whether this is true?

Correct, a few years ago at least.

[RAT 5]

If a contractor is deemed to be an employee then the are entitled to holiday pay, sick pay and many many more benefits, including pension payments etc. There is much much more to this than just tax & social payments. What will be interesting is what the individual will do about it; and what groups of other pilots, and unions, will do about it, and what other tax authorities will do about it.
And don't forget the cabin crew.

[ExDubai]

Originally Posted by PENKO

So what?
How many aircraft does Ryanair base in the Netherlands, 2?
What you need is a court case in Ireland, England, Germany where the bulk of Ryanair pilots live and work.
Dutch tax rules apply in the tiny flat Dutch countryside only, what precedence are we talking about?

I'm not saying this is not a nice victory for 'the pilots vs. Ryanair', but as far as precedence goes this seems very....local. And a bummer for the individual pilot of course.

Oddly this was FRONT page news in the NL. Why on earth?

Wait and see... There was a reason for the raids on the german bases. Last year FR negotiated a deal with a pilot a couple of hours before the court trial started. This will not happen with the current investigations. Interesting times ahead.

[Avenger]

Harry "Never understood why the Revenue in the UK doesn't chase RyanAir - it's a clear breach of IR35 and all sorts of other legistlation..............." Simple.. they have bigger fish to fry. If they really wanted to do anything about this they would have done so years and years ago. The UK HMRC operates a disclosure policy and fine system,, if pilots do not disclose their incomes there is basically bugger all the HMRC can do..Raids on houses etc are pie in the sky..if people are earning money and more importantly spending it in the UK they don't give a fig..thats compared to other bases where folks may earn money and "export it" ..Can't see any changes on the horizon..

[ExDubai]

Originally Posted by RAT 5

If a contractor is deemed to be an employee then the are entitled to holiday pay, sick pay and many many more benefits, including pension payments etc. There is much much more to this than just tax & social payments. What will be interesting is what the individual will do about it; and what groups of other pilots, and unions, will do about it, and what other tax authorities will do about it.
And don't forget the cabin crew.

Yepp, I'm really looking forward what VC will do in Germany. If they are as agressiv as with LH that could be a pain in the ass for MoL

[galaxy flyer]

As a Yank, why does this crazy exist? In the US, the crews would have to employees under law and union contract. Might it be that companies can duck out on legally required benefits by using contractors? Maybe the economic regulations need to change?

[172_driver]

Might it be that companies can duck out on legally required benefits by using contractors?

Definitely, no sick pay, no paid holiday, no maternity/paternity leave, no part time. And best of all, no union to fight. You're only paid when you work, no more no less.

So then you'd think, as a contractor you take holiday when you want, go on part time as you desire. Nope, didn't think so. You signed those rights away in some odd 3 party contract, of questionable legality, when you joined Ryanair as well.

[ExDubai]

Originally Posted by galaxy flyer

As a Yank, why does this crazy exist? In the US, the crews would have to employees under law and union contract. Might it be that companies can duck out on legally required benefits by using contractors? Maybe the economic regulations need to change?

Using loopholes is very popular. If you get not paid when sick you're thinkig twice staying at home or going to work.

[galaxy flyer]

Stil, why is it allowed? Scope clauses kill any thought of it here--scope defines exactly what flying will be done by whom. Isn't there something in EU law that would prevent contracted out work? ?US labor law would prevent it, too.

[FlyingStone]

Originally Posted by galaxy flyer

As a Yank, why does this crazy exist? In the US, the crews would have to employees under law and union contract. Might it be that companies can duck out on legally required benefits by using contractors? Maybe the economic regulations need to change?

Not trying to start US-EU war, but compare starting FO salary at US regionals and EU LCCs.

Less benefits than the US regionals? Definitely. Worse package all-around? Depends, but very much doubt it.

[172_driver]

Stil, why is it allowed? Scope clauses kill any thought of it here--scope defines exactly what flying will be done by whom. Isn't there something in EU law that would prevent contracted out work? ?US labor law would prevent it, too.

As long as the referee is looking the other way....

Court cases in the last few years has made Ryanair close their bases in France, Denmark and Norway. Courts ruled that local labour law shall prevail, not Irish, as it should.

Additionally, the self-employment 'checklist' as mentioned earlier in this thread is there to prevent individuals from making unreasonable tax deductions. There are a lot more tax deductible expenses you can make as a firm rather than private individual. The obvious abuse of this has been under the cover of Ireland, which is known in Europe (and around the world) as corporate haven.

[UAV689]

In answer to question regarding over 60s forced to become contractors this was the case, but one legendary chap out right refused to give up his contract, so i think most people (with backbone) push back when the company trys that stunt on them.

[Piltdown Man]

Galaxy - You are totally correct. With possibly a few exceptions, every Ryanair pilot is really a Ryanair employee. They can work only for one employer, have their base, days off, roster dictated, the uniform they wear dictated by their employer and I'll hazard a guess, all communication is via the pilot, not via their company. That neither contracting nor self-employment.

But MOL is an aggressive, nasty piece of work. You turn up with a knife and he'll have a gun and your first born as hostage. He and has yet tackled by taxmen with balls and backbones. This appears to be the first. With any luck, tax authorities around Europe might grow the bits they are missing and actually deal with with RYR as they should. It is a disgrace and we must stop allowing people like MOL riding rough-shod over every piece of employment protection legislation in the pursuit of cheap fares. Pay people what they deserve, have proper contracts etc. If you want to offer third world employment terms and conditions, sod off and operate there!

[gearlever]

Will Ryanair pay the pilot's lawyer and costs of the court case?

[fox niner]

FWIW, here is the direct link to the court publication: (in dutch of course)
https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/in...RBGEL:2017:224

I might give it a try to translate it into english some time later.

While the court decision speaks for itself, there is another significant aspect to this particular case that you will not find in any newspaper.
Based on the exact wording used in the document, and the semantics used by the court as they wrote down their decision, it appears that this RYR pilot was actually quite HAPPY with the contract as it was set up. He was trying to defend his own position of course, BUT ALSO position of RYR, and the whole scam of intermediate companies that goes with it.
And that is quite damning.
If you are stuck in a bad position, don't try and defend your miserable situation by exhonerating the company that is causing this. (Ryanair)

[shabon]

Good example of Stockholm Syndrome

[RAT 5]

Sounds a little naive, lax preparation of a court case and perhaps some inept advise from legal advisors. One would have thought it would have been better to establish the true employment status, i.e. being an employee of the airline, and then let the tax liability & obligation fall where it may. If it is deemed the pilot did not pay the correct tax and social premiums the mitigating circumstances of the Ltd. construction would be quite strong. They might not remove completely any back tax demands, but being an employee would spread the pain and reduce/remove any penalties.

[Harry Wayfarers]

In one of my previous lives I worked 'offshore' for some 6 years, supposedly self-employed and responsible for paying my own social security and taxes, less any out of pocket expenses of course, but I never did and I got away with it.

In a later previous life I worked for an agency, I became in charge of flight crew recruitment, and if any one of those self-employed flight crew had been paying their social security and taxes then I would be shocked ... I'd buy them a beer.

So with this case of a Dutch national, presumably domicile in the Netherlands, had he been paying his own taxes and social security as a self-employed individual and the authorities adjudicated that he was employed, rather than self-employed, then the difference in taxes payable wouldn't be so significant to make a big song and dance regarding.

So is this scenario that he hadn't been paying any taxes etc. at all or he had only been paying taxes etc. declaring himself as a self-employed individual?

[Kim Jong Il]

Am I correct when I write that you don't get paid if the flight is cancelled for whatever reason? I mean it's not that you could pursue another gig for the same day?