#App Drivers and Couriers Union

[mariacallous]

A small group of protesters stand on the side of a roundabout opposite Brussels’ oak-framed Europa building, which is glowing in the dark. Despite the heavy rain, the group is here to direct their anger at the politicians, who are inside, deciding the future of Europe’s gig economy. In case their chants can’t be heard over the noise of passing traffic, the demonstrators have also printed their message onto a banner. It reads: “Don’t Let Uber Make the Law.”

Among the crowd are Camille Peeters, Marcus Haunold, and Felipe Corredor. The three men work for different companies and live in different countries—in Belgium, Austria, and Spain, respectively. But their experiences working as couriers for some of Europe’s most popular food delivery platforms have led them to the same conclusion. Platforms are taking advantage of their workers, they claim, and now those same companies are attempting to sabotage new rules that were supposed to fix the gig economy’s problems.

“Something has to change, because the current situation is really bad for most platform workers,” says Haunold, who has spent the past five years working for Foodora in Vienna, a food delivery app owned by Berlin-based Delivery Hero. As a “free employee,” a special category of worker in Austria, he is entitled to paid sick leave only after three days of being ill, and he does not receive holiday allowance. He says he’s finding it increasingly difficult to make a living in the gig economy, and in the past year he has started working for a second platform, a delivery service called Wolt, to make ends meet. (Alexander Gaied, chief operating officer at Foodora Austria, disputes the claim that conditions on the platform are getting worse and says riders’ pay per hour has increased 10 percent since January.)

When EU officials first suggested new rules to regulate the gig economy two years ago, Haunold was hopeful that his job was about to change for the better. Negotiations between EU officials over what exactly those rules, known as the Platform Work Directive, should include have been beset by infighting. Trade unionists and labor activists say that’s because the debate has been heavily influenced by Uber.

“I'm very worried,” says Leïla Chaibi, a French member of the European Parliament representing the Left group, who attended the protest. “Uber is using all the tools they can use in order to destroy the directive.”

Uber spokesperson Casper Nixon did not directly address allegations the company is trying to sabotage the rules, which are still being finalized. “The Platform Work Directive as drafted might cost genuine independent [workers] their protections, jobs and flexibility,” he says. “Like any company, we regularly engage with European policymakers to share our experiences and position on regulation that impacts our business, drivers, couriers, and consumers.”

By 2025, the EU predicts more than 40 million of its residents will work for digital platforms, carrying out tasks such as food delivery, taxi driving, babysitting, caring for the elderly, or data entry. That will make the number of people in the platform labor force larger than the population of Poland, the EU’s fifth-largest country. The new EU platform work rules were intended to better balance the interests of platforms and workers by setting clear guidelines on the use of algorithmic managers, as well as the gig economy’s most contentious issue: workers’ employment status. Right now, millions of platform workers exist in a legal gray area, where it is unclear if they are employees, who are entitled to sick pay and pensions, or if they’re self-employed free agents, who are not.

But recently, any optimism that the new rules could offer more certainty has soured. Unions and activist groups representing platform workers are wary of Uber’s influence because the company’s lobbying has been successful before. In California, voters endorsed a 2020 ballot measure that maintained ride-hailing drivers’ status as independent contractors, after a coalition of companies, including Uber, ran a $200 million campaign in support of the measure. Last year, The Guardian and Le Monde reported that Uber forged close ties with French president Emmanuel Macron while he was economy minister, in order to navigate the strong resistance by local taxi drivers and break into the French market. Nixon, Uber’s spokesperson, claims the company’s “engagement” with Macron was not followed by more favorable regulations.

Now platform workers are concerned that Uber is about to repeat past lobbying success in the EU by shaping the new platform work rules. “The lobby has been mega-intense, especially Uber,” says Kim Van Sparrentak, a Dutch Green member of the European Parliament (MEP), who is responsible for monitoring the new platform work rules for her party. “They have lobbied as much as they could to try to avoid this legislation being useful,” says Van Sparrentak, who has been in the room during the negotiations. “Sometimes it feels like you’re negotiating with tech companies rather than member states.”

Both Van Sparrentak and Chaibi say that arguments put forward by Uber—particularly that a directive that automatically classifies platform workers as employees would threaten jobs—have been repeated by other MEPs and representatives of the European Council.

Under EU transparency rules, companies need to declare their lobbying budget. In 2022, Uber’s budget was between €700,000 and €799,999 ($760,300 to $869,300). Since 2019, the company has declared 10 meetings with the EU Commission about the directive and another 10 with MEPs, according to data shared with WIRED by Transparency International EU (TIEU).

WIRED and TIEU analysis found another 30 meetings focused on platform work since 2019, which had taken place between MEPs or Commission officials and organizations that are allowed to lobby on Uber’s behalf. Like many companies, Uber is a member of several lobbying groups, including BusinessEurope and MoveEU. Information in the French lobby register also showed that Uber has been discussing the directive with the highest level of the French government. Representatives of France in the EU did not respond to WIRED’s request for comment.

“Uber is the 404th-biggest spender in Brussels, and it pales in comparison to other organizations involved in the [Platform Work Directive] debate,” Nixon says.

It’s true that the Transparency Register does not make it seem like Uber is doing huge amounts of lobbying, says Chaibi, the French MEP. “They're doing a lot of lobbying but using other tools.”

This includes funding research and advertising. Chaibi points to a 2021 study on platform work by the consulting firm Accenture, which states it was commissioned by Uber. Another study by consultancy Copenhagen Economics was commissioned the same year by Delivery Platforms Europe, a lobbying group that counts UberEats among its members. Uber was also among a group of five companies that signed a letter published by the Financial Times in June that argued the EU’s platform regulation was taking the wrong approach.

Uber has also been funneling money into online ads. In September, the platform started running a series of Instagram adverts in Belgium, promoting the company’s positive impact on Europe’s economy, according to Meta’s ad library. “Uber provides benefits—parental leave, sick pay, injury cover and more—to all eligible European drivers and couriers,” one ad read, glossing over the debate about who exactly is eligible. “Myths fuel misunderstandings about Uber’s mission and business practices, so it’s time we shared the facts,” read another.

“Our advertising campaign simply puts certified facts about the company in the public domain,” says Uber spokesperson Nixon. “Uber supports a strong and enforceable directive that ensures platform workers maintain the independence they want and receive the protections they deserve, such as minimum wage, holiday and sick pay.”

What’s at stake for Uber with the new rules is the employment classification of its Uber drivers and UberEats couriers. “Classification is the entry point into the whole range of protections, everything from protection against unfair dismissal, through to sick leave, through to parental or maternity leave, through to discrimination protection,” says Jeremias Adams-Prassl, a law professor at the University of Oxford. “That's why you can also see the attraction of misclassifying workers. If you misclassify individuals, you can try to avoid all of those obligations.”

Officials are divided about how platform workers should be classified. Many MEPs favor rules that would presume all platform workers are employees—unless the platforms can prove otherwise. But some representatives of EU member states, sitting in the European Council, prefer a system where workers first have to prove they meet a number of criteria before they can challenge their employment status. That’s because member states worry that if the rules are too strict, platforms would respond by shrinking their platform workforce, says Ludovic Voet, confederal secretary at the European Trade Union Confederation. “Some of these countries don't want to confront a business model that might push people out of employment statistics.” Four months after Spain introduced its rider’s law, which mandated that delivery couriers should be considered staff, Deliveroo closed its operations in the country entirely.

Platform workers worry that member states would struggle to enforce whatever new rules the EU passes. Standing in the rain in Brussels, Peeters explains he has worked for UberEats in the city for the past six years. In January, new rules took effect in Belgium that were meant to make it easier for platform workers to be classified as employees. “You know what’s changed? Nothing,” says Peeters. “The price I pay for rent is going up. The price I pay for food is going up. But my [employment] status has stayed the same.” Nixon says Uber complies with all applicable laws wherever it operates. “In Belgium we provide all independent drivers and couriers with free injury, sickness and paternity cover.”

In Spain, the “riders law” has been criticized in some quarters for being ineffective. “The biggest company there, Glovo, is not fulfilling this law for years and years with total impunity,” claims Corredor, who worked as a Deliveroo courier in Spain between 2016 and 2017 and is now an activist for the platform workers group Riders x Derechos. The point of Spain’s riders law was also to force platforms to classify more of their workers as employees. Instead of doing that, Glovo tweaked many of their couriers’ work terms so they could still be classified as independent, according to Corredor. “We are confident that our operating model in Spain, launched in August 2021, meets all regulatory requirements,” says Felix Eggert, spokesperson for Glovo.

For Corredor, this is all part of a bigger battle, where platform workers are battling to fight for the basic rights—minimum wage and maximum working hours—that exist in the rest of the economy. “This is [the platforms’] strategy, using the discourse of innovation and technology to take out these rights,” he claims. “I think this is very problematic.”

[olko71]

New Post has been published on All about business online

New Post has been published on https://yaroreviews.info/2024/02/deliveroo-and-uber-eats-riders-strike-on-valentines-day

Deliveroo and Uber Eats riders strike on Valentine's Day

Getty Images

By Jemma Dempsey

BBC News

Takeaway delivery drivers are planning to strike on Valentine’s Day to demand better pay and improved working conditions.

The action, impacting four food apps including Deliveroo and Uber Eats, is thought to involve as many as 3,000 drivers and riders on Wednesday between 17:00 and 22:00 GMT.

One cyclist taking part told the BBC their pay was “absolutely ridiculous”.

Deliveroo said its riders “always earn at least the national living wage”.

The action, organised by a grassroots group of couriers, many of whom are Brazilian, is intended to draw attention to what has been described as poor pay and working conditions many riders face while delivering food and groceries in cities across the UK.

“Sacrificing a few hours for our rights is essential, instead of continuing to work incessantly for insufficient wages,” the group Delivery Job UK said on its Instagram page.

“Our request is simple: we want fair compensation for the work we do. We are tired of being exploited and risking our lives every day… It’s time for our voices to be heard.”

Aside from Deliveroo and Uber Eats, Just Eat and Stuart.com will also be affected, with couriers who normally compete across multiple apps for delivery planning to refuse to take orders.

The action will extend beyond the UK.

In the US, drivers for Uber, Lyft and food delivery firms are also set to halt work for two hours on Wednesday, according to Justice for App Workers, which says it represents more than 130,000 app drivers.

Organisers said members would not be giving any rides to and from the airport in 10 major cities, including Chicago and Miami.

Delivery Job UK claimed its delivery riders were braving the “cold, rain and absurd distances” for deliveries paying “ridiculous values”, ranging from £2.80 to £3.15.

A spokesman for the group told the BBC striking Deliveroo riders wanted an increase to a minimum of £5. The other companies use different pricing structures.

“They [Deliveroo] have lowered their fees. There’s no incentive anymore. On a Friday night you could make £100 over 4-5 hours, now that’s gone,” the spokesman said.

He also claimed couriers were exposed to “a lot of violence on the streets”, especially in the evenings.

Deliveroo not forced by law to engage with unions

Children working for food delivery apps, BBC finds

Joe, a courier in London since 2018 who plans to strike on Wednesday, said the work was “incredibly isolating” and attracted a lot of migrant workers who were unable to challenge the conditions and were “forced into it”.

“Conditions are shocking,” he told the BBC. “The pricing of fees is aggressive. It’s hard to overstate how sophisticated these algorithms have become. The fees are absolutely ridiculous.”

Callum Cant, who has written about the gig economy and is a lecturer at Essex University, said changes to fees meant couriers had seen a 40% drop in wages in real terms since 2018.

“With a minimum fee of £2.80, most might only be making three orders an hour, and then they have to subtract their costs too. Some are making £7 an hour, which in London is barely liveable,” he said.

While delivery drivers are not formally unionised the GMB has an agreement with Deliveroo which, the union has said, is the first of its kind in the food delivery sector.

It includes access to education courses and a pay floor for fees, negotiated each April.

In a statement, Deliveroo said it offered its riders self-employed, flexible work, alongside protections.

“Riders always earn at least the national living wage, plus vehicle costs, for the time they are working with us, though the vast majority earn far more than this,” it said.

“Riders are also automatically insured for free, covering them if they are in an accident or injured while working and receive income protection if they are unwell and cannot work.”

Uber Eats told the BBC it offered a “flexible way” for couriers to earn by using its app “when and where they choose”.

“We know that the vast majority of couriers are satisfied with their experience on the app, and we regularly engage with couriers to look at how we can improve their experience.”

Just Eat said it provided “a highly competitive base rate to self-employed couriers and also offer regular incentives to help them maximise their earnings”.

“We continue to review our pay structure regularly and welcome any feedback from couriers,” the company added.

Stuart.com said it also was “committed to providing competitive earnings opportunities for courier partners”.

Related Topics

Companies

Deliveroo

Takeaway food

Gig economy

Just Eat Takeaway

More on this story

Deliveroo not forced by law to engage with unions

21 November 2023

Children working for food delivery apps, BBC finds

14 November 2023

Food delivery riders strike over pay and conditions

6 October 2023

[whatsonmedia]

Uber Workers on Strike amid Whistleblower Report!

The App drivers and Couriers union (ADCU) called for 24- hours strike for public and driver for ceasing the use of Uber. This strike is against the "exploitation of workers". This came after the whistleblowing of the Uber files, a trove of thousands of leaked confidential documents that show how the ride-hail company broke laws. Karl Marx, Engles and Vladimir Lenin or any leftist movement have always supported the workers' movement and strikes because of the capitalist nature of the society. The secretly lobbied governments and exploited drivers safety have been expanded aggressively from 2013 to 2017. As Karl Marx said, "let the capitalist tremble on Workers' movement", the strike of Uber drivers have made it impossible to travel for passengers. Workers have been brutally exploited by their employers and also because of the "political graft". Uber drivers strike holding a banner The ADCU had asked drivers not to open the app on Wednesday and asked passengers to not use the service. The union also held a public demonstration at Uber Uk's head office ay Aldgate Towers in London between 12pm and 2pm on Wednesday. The Union demanded from the government to immediately follow the UK's Supreme Court ruling on worker rights in full, which last year "re-classified Uber drivers as workers". Also they demanded that Uber pays its drivers back pay owed as a result of the court ruling; and end "unethical political influencing in the UK". These demands are all ethical demands which have been put up by the Union. Also it is revealed that after court's ruling Uber didn't make any changes to treat the driver. The minimum rights of workers have been disrespected and neglected by the capitalist class from time immemorial. As Martin Luther King said, "the labour movement was the principal that transformed misery and despair into hope and progress". This is the reason why these strikes are necessary to improve the condition of working class. WhatsOn stands in solidarity with workers movement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A14Vls_Y6ck Read the full article

[isfeed]

UK union staged 24-hour strike in response to Uber Files leak

UK union staged 24-hour strike in response to Uber Files leak

The UK’s App Drivers and Couriers Union (ADCU) staged a 24-hour strike Wednesday to demand Uber be held accountable for the findings of the Uber Files, a trove of thousands of leaked confidential documents that show how the ride-hail company broke laws, secretly lobbied governments and exploited driver safety to expand aggressively from 2013 to 2017. The ADCU asked drivers not to open the app on…

View On WordPress

#technology

[cathkaesque]

Longest Gig Economy Strike Ongoing in Sheffield - Please Donate to the Strike Fund!

Just Eat, the takeaway food website, subcontracts its deliveries to a company called Stuart. Stuart is imposing a 25% cut on the minimum delivery fee paid to drivers from £4.50 to £3.40. While Stuart is imposing this 25% pay cut, Stuart’s CEO received a 1068% pay increase between 2019 and 2020 (from £210,000 to £2,234,453). 

Gig economy workers like Stuart couriers are legally counted as “independent contractors” rather than employees. This means they have no guarenteed right to sick pay, holiday pay, or minimum wages. They are paid per delivery rather than by the hour. After costs for insurance, petrol, and time spent waiting for food to be prepared are deducted, drivers rarely make minimum wage.

To resist the pay cut, Stuart couriers in Sheffield have been refusing orders from McDonalds from 5 till 10 since December 6th. McDonalds make up about 30% of Just Eat’s custom, and the loss of orders is costing Stuart, Just Eat, and McDonalds thousands of pounds.

This is the longest strike of gig economy workers in UK history, and is spreading rapidly across the country. When hearing about the Sheffield action, drivers in Chesterfield shut the app down entirely (some of us drove all the way over to help them out!). Couriers in Sunderland staged a protest against the pay cut last Saturday. Riders in Huddersfield voted tonight (14th December) to join the strike from this Friday. There are also rumours of more cities preparing to join.

Working for Stuart is by its nature very precarious and low paid. In order to sustain this action, the union needs funds to pay drivers for their time picketing and support drivers going through hardship. If you can, please donate to their strike fund to help us sustain this action. Thank you!

#socialism #strikes #trade unions #deliveroo #gig economy #stuart delivery #United Kingdom #Sheffield

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Gig workers around the globe

My 2010 YA science fiction novel For the Win imagines a global solidarity movement among precarious gig workers paid to "gold farm" inside massively multiplayer online games.

https://craphound.com/category/ftw/

The kids who do this work realize they have more in common with each other than their bosses, and form a global syndicalist union called the Industrial Workers of the World Wide Web (IWWW) or "Webblies."

Gold farming remains a source of exploitative labor, xenophobic in-game violence, and acts of solidarity, but it's only a tiny sliver of the true gig economy, which started with traditional low-waged delivery and driving work and has spread to MDs.

https://www.npr.org/2021/07/21/1018915121/video-gaming-the-system

"The Global Gig Workers" is a new, important report on the gig economy around the world, published by Rest of World. It's grounded in a survey of 4,500 gig workers in 15 countries, backstopped by seven profiles of workers in seven countries.

https://restofworld.org/2021/the-global-gig-workers/

The package includes a dive into the small coterie of investors that are behind the drive to export the gig economy to every nation on earth, delving into how they describe the business opportunity gig work represents.

https://restofworld.org/2021/global-gig-workers-investors-behind-gig-work-model/

It won't surprise you to learn that what attracts investors to gig work is the potential to scale up a company at workers' expense. Building the app and bribing, coercing or convincing local authorities to allow it to operate is a fixed cost; running the service is cheap.

The capital costs - bikes, trucks, cars, phones, data-plans - are all borne by workers, who, thanks to systematic worker misclassification, are treated as independent contractors who are not entitled to benefits or workplace protection.

And while the workers must buy expensive capital equipment and have their days scripted to a fine degree by the electronic nag of the app, the company offers them no assurance that compliance and performance will be rewarded with a fair wage.

Not only do workers routinely see their pay slashed after they've established themselves with the company, thanks to unilateral shifts in the compensation structure (as well as changes to the apps to hide how much a job pays until the worker has completed it).

But entire, debt-financed capital investments by workers can be wiped out by a "pivot" in corporate strategy, as happened to Zweli Ngwenya, an Uber driver in Johannesburg who went into debt to buy a car that qualified him to drive for Uberx.

Ngwenya relied on Uberx-style compensation to service the debt on the capital asset he purchased to help Uber scale up its South African business. But then Uber rolled out a cheaper alternative, Uber Go, that didn't require a fancy car, and paid lower compensation.

Ngwenya's wages have "plummeted." He may not be able to service the debt he incurred. A company that expected him to frog whenever its app told him to jump never extended even the thinnest fiction of a reciprocal  degree of respect and care.

There's a lot to be learned from Rest of World's data analysis. For example, there's an excellent article on "How the platform economy sets women up to fail," which traces the gender inequities in the structure of the gig economy.

https://restofworld.org/2021/global-gig-workers-how-platforms-set-women-up-to-fail/

But what I found most fascinating was the introductory article, "How the gig workers are fighting back," detailing how gig workers around the world are making common cause with one another.

https://restofworld.org/2021/gig-workers-around-the-world-are-finally-organizing/

These movements cross sectors - uniting drivers and bike deliverers and grocery shoppers - and national boundaries, as well as the far less permeable barriers between high-income and low-income countries.

Because even though there are striking differences between the lives of the seven gig workers profiled in the package - a doctor in India, a truck driver in Indonesia, a rideshare driver in Ethiopia - the similarities are even more striking.

Even though these workers can articulate benefits to their situation, they all describe the same pathology of their implacable app overlords - a steady ramping-up of work to a dangerous  inhuman pace, a race to the bottom from app companies promising faster, cheaper service.

The same pattern is repeated around the globe. Josh Dzieza's beautifully written longread on the lives of NYC bike-delivery couriers repeats all the themes of these workers around the global south.

https://www.theverge.com/22667600/delivery-workers-seamless-uber-relay-new-york-electric-bikes-apps

Like my imaginary Webblies, these workers are facing a common enemy, and they're banding together online to fight back. What's more, these workers are canaries in the labor coalmine: if your job can be done by zoom, some asshole is currently pitching that  business-plan.

Teachers, lawyers, doctors, illustrators, writers - the gig economy is everyone's future - it's just not evenly distributed. Whether you're ordering dinner from an app or delivering it, you have a common enemy in the form of rapacious, inhumane global capital.

But it doesn't have to be this way. These businesses don't need to operate at inhumane tempo to be viable. They don't need to offload capital costs to workers. They don't need to misclassify employees and escape fair workplace standards. We let them do it, so they do it.

We can stop them. The beneficiaries of the gig economy are few. Its victims are many. The same tools that offer instantaneous, globe-spanning exploitation can also be a framework for global, realtime solidarity movements.

#pluralistic

[veganvenom]

UBER EATS WORKERS STRIKE 08/05/19

On the 9th of May Uber will hold their ‘IPO’, where they start selling their shares to the public. They have told their investors that, in order to grow and remain profitable, they intend to cut our pay and onboard more workers.

They have shown complete contempt for their own workers, and it’s time that we all, drivers and couriers united, show that we won’t take an attack on our conditions lying down.

United Private Hire Drivers are holding demonstrations at the following locations on Wednesday the 8th of May:

London - 1PM @ Uber UK Head Office, 1 Aldgate Tower, E1 8FA Birmingham - 1PM @ 100 Broad Street, B15 1AE Nottingham - 1PM @ King Edward Court Unit C, NG1 1EL Glasgow - 2PM @ Buchanan Steps, G1 2NG

... or organise an action in your own city!

FB: IWW Couriers Network / IWGB Couriers & Logistics Branch / United Private Hire Drivers

If you’re in one of these cities and able to, grab a mate and get down to the picket to show your solidarity. You don’t need to be in one of these unions or be a driver. Bringing snacks or cakes to hand out always goes over well, or a few coins to contribute to the strike fund, but just you turning up and showing your support is more than enough.

If you can’t get out to a picket, still do not cross the digital picket line!

On 8th May, log off the app! Fuck Uber!

#strikes #uber strike #ubereats #uber eats #(i'm not a courier but was asked to share)

[worklabournewsresearch]

Gig Workers: United States, Prop 22, and Canada

“Are gig workers employees or freelance contractors? ... California lawmakers last year passed legislation that reclassified gig workers as employees. The backlash from gig economy companies was immediate, and Uber and similar app-based businesses have committed nearly $200 million to support a state ballot measure — making it the costliest in state history — that would exempt them from the law. .... Prop 22 is designed to exempt a few industry players from a statute that those same companies have improperly ignored since it was put in place. The ballot measure also would codify a system that denies workers full benefits, local minimum wage guarantees and stability — things that are especially crucial during the coronavirus pandemic.”

“Gig industry giants long ago settled on treating their workers as independent contractors, which allows flexible hours for workers but spares the companies the expense of extending benefits like employer-paid health insurance and reimbursement for fuel and vehicle expenses. That structure — along with not having to pay severance, payroll taxes and for unemployment insurance — helps to keep their costs low. ... Nearly three-quarters of gig laborers work 30 hours a week or more — they are already effectively full time, but they enjoy virtually none of the protections that full-time employees do.”

NY Times, October 12, 2020: “Opinion: California, Reject Prop 22Gig workers deserve the dignity of fair compensation”

California General Election Voter Guide on Prop 22

California Labor Federation FAQ on Prop 22

CalMatters, October 27, 2020: “Lawsuits and labor backlash: Prop. 22’s cutthroat final days,” by Lauren Helper

LA Times, October 27, 2020: “Uber, Lyft, DoorDash workers on Prop. 22: ‘I don’t want to end up on the wrong side’,” by Suhauna Hussain, Johana Bhuiyan

NY Times, October 12, 2020: “You Can’t Escape Uber’s Lobbying”

Gig Workers Rising on Prop 22

Gig Workers Collective on Prop 22

Gig Workers in Canada

“In February, Foodora workers won their case at the Ontario Labour Board, after it ruled they had been incorrectly classified by Foodora as independent contractors, but were in fact dependent contractors. The redesignation meant employee status for the couriers, winning them the right to form a union. Before they could count the ballots, Foodora pulled out of Canada completely, in a move which CUPW alleged was union busting, but Foodora said was due to bankruptcy. Nonetheless, Foodora workers successfully certified their union on June 12, and in August, workers won a $3.46-million settlement from Foodora in light of the company's abrupt departure.”

“Uber v Heller is a proposed $400-million class action suit following similar logic to that of the Foodora instance: that Uber drivers should be legally recognized as employees as opposed to independent contractors. Without employee status, workers do not have access to the rights and protections offered under the Employment Standards Act, including the right to organize. The class action alleges that currently, Uber drivers are subject to many violations of the ESA, and that Uber has intentionally misclassified them. A preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court of Canada earlier this year has paved the way for the class action to proceed. The case before the SCC pertained to Uber's arbitration system, which previously required workers to take their claims to the Netherlands where they would be subject to Dutch law, and pay a $14,500 filing fee to do so.”

Rabble, October 9, 2020: “The state of Canada's gig economy: how workers are organizing,” by Chelsea Nash

UFCW Canada on Uber Drivers

Canadian Law of Work Forum, September 23, 2020: “The Classification of “Gig” Workers in Canadian Work Law,” by David Doorey

#gig workers #prop 22 #uber #lyft #door dash #instacart

[foodbytesback]

Grubhub's Buyout has Implications for Late-Stage Capitalism

It’s hard to imagine, with many restaurants still only open for takeout and delivery, that any of the major online ordering and delivery apps would be struggling to get by.   Nonetheless, Grubhub has been bought out by Just Eat Takeaway, a British competitor.

Despite having originally been an innovator in the delivery app boom, Grubhub has been suffering a bust from the rise of countless competitors in the market, and had been seeking a buyout since before COVID hit.  Uber had been looking into acquiring the company, but walked away after increased concerns over antitrust laws (despite also commenting that they “still see consolidation of the food delivery industry as a path to profitability.”)  

It feels important to point out that this merger is also coinciding with the European Union’s antitrust investigations looking into companies such as Amazon and Apple, with the U.S. possibly launching a similar investigation of Google.

And there’s the exhausting thing about capitalism: if all the major delivery apps saddle restaurants with exorbitant fees and treat their drivers like garbage, it’s hard to feel like being able to choose between 4 or 5 different apps really makes a difference.  And it turns out that the delivery apps themselves get screwed over when trying to secure contracts with larger chain restaurants.  It’s hard to believe in capitalist ideals like “competition” or “innovation” when no one benefits from any of it.  But the illusion of choice is the only thing that keeps industry giants from just doing whatever the hell they want, so we’ll have to cling to them until society as a whole is ready to throw the whole thing out.

A while back, a number of chefs on Twitter were talking about their frustrations with delivery apps, and briefly discussed the possibilities of organizing their own delivery services.  Presumably, the talks didn’t go very far for the same reasons that apps are looking to merge for: it’s just not profitable.  

Everyone loves to talk about how they love to support independent businesses, so theoretically they would be willing to pay a little extra to support a local restaurant’s delivery service, or even some form of co-op courier service.  But the fact that ““in these trying times”” everyone decided to do all their impulse shopping at Amazon, putting Bezos well on track to become the first ever trillionaire, makes me a little less optimistic.  It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy of people opting for the cheapest alternative, so companies cut or stagnate workers’ wages to keep costs down, so now those workers have no choice but to seek out the cheapest alternatives.

I’m not saying revolution is the only option, but I’m pretty much out of ideas at this point.

#food #grubhub #just eat takeaway #delivery apps #apps #capitalism #hey look this one's a lot shorter than last week

[phroyd]

Well, Thank You California! No more can the App Based Multi-Million Dollar Companies make their fortunes off of the backs of under-paid employees, and an avoidance of essential payroll taxes! - Phroyd

SACRAMENTO — California legislators approved a landmark bill on Tuesday that requires companies like Uber and Lyft to treat contract workers as employees, a move that could reshape the gig economy and that adds fuel to a yearslong debate over whether the nature of work has become too insecure.

The bill passed in a 29 to 11 vote in the State Senate and will apply to app-based companies, despite their efforts to negotiate an exemption. California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, endorsed the bill this month and is expected to sign it after it goes through the State Assembly, in what is expected to be a formality. Under the measure, which would go into effect Jan. 1, workers must be designated as employees instead of contractors if a company exerts control over how they perform their tasks or if their work is part of a company’s regular business.

The bill may influence other states. A coalition of labor groups is pushing similar legislation in New York, and bills in Washington State and Oregon that were similar to California’s but failed to advance could see renewed momentum. New York City passed a minimum wage for ride-hailing drivers last year but did not try to classify them as employees.

In California, the legislation will affect at least one million workers who have been on the receiving end of a decades-long trend of outsourcing and franchising work, making employer-worker relationships more arm’s-length. Many people have been pushed into contractor status with no access to basic protections like a minimum wage and unemployment insurance. Ride-hailing drivers, food-delivery couriers, janitors, nail salon workers, construction workers and franchise owners could now all be reclassified as employees.

But the bill’s passage, which codifies and extends a 2018 California Supreme Court ruling, threatens gig economy companies like Uber and Lyft. The ride-hailing firms — along with app-based services that offer food delivery, home repairs and dog-walking services — have built their businesses on inexpensive, independent labor. Uber and Lyft, which have hundreds of thousands of drivers in California, have said contract work provides people with flexibility. They have warned that recognizing drivers as employees could destroy their businesses.

“It will have major reverberations around the country,” said David Weil, a top Labor Department official during the Obama administration and the author of a book on the so-called fissuring of the workplace. He argued that the bill could set a new bar for worker protections and force business owners to rethink their reliance on contractors.

California legislators said the bill, known as Assembly Bill 5 and proposed by State Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, a Democrat, would set the tone for the future of work.

“Today the so-called gig companies present themselves as the innovative future of tomorrow, a future where companies don’t pay Social Security or Medicare,” said State Senator Maria Elena Durazo, a Democrat. “Let’s be clear: there is nothing innovative about underpaying someone for their labor.”

She added, ”Today we are determining the future of the California economy.”

Ride-hailing drivers hailed the bill’s passage. “I am so proud of rideshare drivers who took time out of their lives to share their stories, stand up, speak to legislators and hope they take a moment to bask in a victory,” said Rebecca Stack-Martinez, a driver and an organizer with the group Gig Workers Rising.

Uber did not immediately have a comment. Earlier on Tuesday, it laid off 435 workers in its product and engineering teams, the company’s second round of cuts in recent months.

Lyft said it was disappointed. “Today, our state’s political leadership missed an important opportunity to support the overwhelming majority of rideshare drivers who want a thoughtful solution that balances flexibility with an earnings standard and benefits,” said Adrian Durbin, a Lyft spokesman.

Gig-type work has been under the spotlight for years as companies like Uber, Lyft and DoorDash in the United States — as well as Didi Chuxing in China and Ola in India — have grown into behemoths even as the contractors they relied on did not receive the benefits or minimum pay guaranteed to employees. Many of the companies have worked assiduously to beat back efforts to classify their workers as employees, settling class-action lawsuits from drivers and securing exemptions from rules that might have threatened the drivers’ freelancer status.

While regulators in California and at least three other states — New York, Alaska and Oregon — had found that ride-hailing drivers were employees under state laws for narrow purposes, like eligibility for unemployment insurance, those findings could be overridden by state laws explicitly deeming the drivers as contractors. About half the states in the nation had passed such provisions.

But more recently, the tide began changing. Two federal proposalsintroduced since 2018 have sought to redefine the way workers are classified to allow more of them to unionize. Those proposals have received support from candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination, including Senators Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. The presidential hopefuls also lent their endorsement to the California bill.

In Britain, Uber has appealed a decision by a labor tribunal that drivers must be classified as workers entitled to minimum wage and vacation. The country’s Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in the case next year.

“Some form of benefits to some population of drivers seems inevitable,” said Lloyd Walmsley, an equity research analyst at Deutsche Bank who follows the ride-hailing industry.

A critical question is how gig economy companies will react to California’s new law. Industry officials have estimated that having to rely on employees rather than contractors raises costs by 20 to 30 percent.

Uber and Lyft have repeatedly warned that they will have to start scheduling drivers in advance if they are employees, reducing drivers’ ability to work when and where they want.

Experts said that there is nothing in the bill that requires employees to work set shifts, and that Uber and Lyft are legally entitled to continue allowing drivers to make their own scheduling decisions.

In practice, Uber and Lyft might choose to limit the number of drivers who can work during slow hours or in less busy markets, where drivers may not generate enough in fares to justify their payroll costs as employees. That could lead to a reduced need for drivers over all.

But Veena Dubal, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law, said it would still generally be advantageous for Uber and Lyft to rely on incentives like bonus pay to ensure they had enough drivers on the road to adjust to customer demand much more nimbly than if they scheduled drivers in advance.

“It doesn’t make sense for them” to drastically limit flexibility, she said.

Some of the companies are not done fighting the bill. Uber, Lyft and DoorDash have pledged to spend $90 million to support a ballot initiative that would essentially exempt them from the legislation. Uber has also said it will litigate misclassification claims from drivers in arbitration and press lawmakers to consider a separate bill that could exempt them from A.B. 5’s impact when the legislative session begins in January.

California cities will have ways to enforce the new law. In last-minute amendments to the measure, legislators gave large cities the right to sue companies that don’t comply.

The bill was not universally supported by drivers. Some opposed it because they worried it would make it hard to keep a flexible schedule. After Uber and Lyft sent messages to drivers and riders in California in August asking them to contact legislators on the companies’ behalf, legislative aides said they had noticed a spike in calls.

As the bill wound its way through the Legislature, the ride-hailing companies sought an agreement that would create a new category of workers between contractor and employee. They met with labor groups and Governor Newsom’s office to negotiate a deal to give drivers a minimum wage and the right to organize, while stopping short of classifying them as employees.

But in July and August, labor groups balked, and the proposed deal disintegrated. Some company officials have expressed cautious optimism in recent days about striking a deal with labor after the bill’s passage.

Phroyd

#uber technologies inc #california #apps

[harpianews]

Uber prices may rise 20% after UK decision

Uber prices may rise 20% after UK decision

James Farrar, general secretary of the App Drivers and Courier Union (ADCU), said: “Instead of fixing its broken business model, Uber was determined to double down on misclassification at the expense of workers’ rights, passenger safety and VAT avoidance. . With inputs from BBC

View On WordPress

[mikegranich87]

Uber to face UK tribunal over 'racially discriminatory' facial recognition systems

Drivers in the UK are taking legal action against Uber over its real-time biometric identification checks, TechCrunch has reported. A union representing the drivers claims that some members were wrongly suspended when they were misidentified, and lost their licenses as a result. "[The] facial recognition systems... are inherently faulty and generate particularly poor accuracy results when used with people of color," the App Drivers & Couriers Union (ADCU) wrote in a blog post.

Backed by two worker's rights groups, the union is crowdfunding the legal action, taken on behalf of former UberEats courier Pa Edrissa Manjang and former Uber driver Imran Javaid Raja. It said they were "unfairly dismissed after the company's facial recognition system failed to identify them."

"Workers are prompted to provide a real-time selfie and face dismissal if the system fails to match the selfie with a stored reference photo," the ADCU wrote. "In turn, private hire drivers who have been dismissed also faced automatic revocation of their private hire driver and vehicle licenses by Transport for London."

BREAKING: in global first, the ADCU launches legal action against Uber's racist facial recognition software.https://t.co/cTIT96AXjV

— ADCU (@ADCUnion) October 5, 2021

Earlier in 2021, Uber was forced to reclassify UK drivers as workers, offering benefits like pension pay and holiday time. That came about because of a lawsuit filed on behalf of two Uber drivers, James Farrer and Yaseen Aslam, who eventually helped form the ADCU in February 2020. 

Transport for London (TfL) pulled Uber's license in 2019 over "a pattern of failures." One particular sore point was that it allowed uninsured and suspended drivers to operate in the city, due to a loophole allowing them to upload their photos to another driver's account. To meet the regulator's requirements, Uber introduced random driver checks via a facial recognition system that uses Microsoft's FACE API technology, according to the ADCU. (Uber won back its license in September of 2020.)

The union noted that Microsoft withdrew sales of its facial recognition software to US police departments, and that the use of similar software has been discontinued or banned by Amazon, IBM, Axon and other companies. It also cited stats showing that facial recognition programs are far less accurate for people of color. 

However, Uber pushed back, saying that it doesn't depend solely on AI. "Our Real-Time ID Check is designed to protect the safety and security of everyone who uses the Uber app by helping ensure the correct driver is behind the wheel," Uber responded in a statement to TechCrunch. "The system includes robust human review to make sure that this algorithm is not making decisions about someone’s livelihood in a vacuum, without oversight." It added that no Uber or Uber Eats accounts is suspended solely as a result of AI. 

However, Farrer said that the union has won at least 10 appeals in court against drivers dismissed by TfL that cite Uber's ID checks. "With Imran [Javaid Raja], Uber and TfL have already admitted they got it wrong. But he was out of work for three months. No apology. No compensation,”

from Mike Granich https://www.engadget.com/uber-drivers-take-legal-action-over-racially-discriminatory-facial-recognition-093531420.html?src=rss

[innocentamit]

Uber faces trial in UK over identification of their 'discriminatory' faces

Uber faces trial in UK over identification of their ‘discriminatory’ faces

Drivers in the UK taking action pauber at Uber on virtual biometric detection, Products they say. The union representing the drivers alleges that some members were mistakenly suspended when they were not identified, and lost their licenses. “[The] face recognition systems … are flawed and produce unintended consequences especially when used by people of color, “App Drivers & Couriers Union (ADCU)…

View On WordPress

[noncyowen]

UnionDues: The ADCU union and the battle for Uber drivers' rights

UnionDues: The ADCU union and the battle for Uber drivers’ rights

How do you organise app-based workers? Simon Sapper explores the issue in this UnionDues special. Simon Sapper is a trade unionist and host of the UnionDues podcast. Despite recent defeat in the UK Supreme Court and a ground-breaking agreement with the GMB (discussed in this earlier UnionDues programme), James Farrar, leader of the App-based Drivers and Couriers Union (ADCU) says Uber is in no…

View On WordPress

[orbemnews]

A Worker-Owned Cooperative Tries to Compete With Uber and Lyft For years, Uber and other ride-hailing companies offered the promise of entrepreneurship to drivers. Drivers who were eager to set their own schedules signed up in droves, propelling the gig economy into a multibillion-dollar industry. But some drivers never received the control and independence they had expected. They struggled with the costs of vehicle maintenance, loans and insurance, and they questioned whether Uber and Lyft paid a fair wage. Legislative efforts to grant them employment benefits were thwarted. Now, dissatisfied drivers and labor advocates are forming worker-owned cooperatives in an attempt to take back some of the money — and power — in the gig economy. The Drivers Cooperative, which opened for business in New York this week, is the most recent attempt. The group, founded by a former Uber employee, a labor organizer and a black-car driver, began issuing ownership shares to drivers in early May and will start offering rides through its app on Sunday. The cooperative has recruited around 2,500 drivers so far and intends to take a smaller commission than Uber or Lyft and charge riders a lower fare. It is an ambitious plan to challenge the ride-hailing giants, and it faces the same hurdles that tend to block other emerging players in the industry: Few have the technical prowess, the venture capital dollars or the supply of readily available drivers to subvert an established company like Uber. Still, drivers who joined the effort said even a small cooperative could make a big difference in their work, allowing them to earn more money and have a say in the way the company was run. The Drivers Cooperative said it planned to pay 10 percent above the wage minimums set by the city’s Taxi and Limousine Commission, and return profits to drivers in the form of dividends. In normal times, the higher wage might attract drivers to the cooperative. But these are not normal times. Many drivers have been hesitant to return to the road given the pandemic, creating a national shortage. During an earnings report this month, Uber said it had 3.5 million active drivers and couriers during the first three months of the year, down 22 percent from the previous year. The company has responded by aggressively increasing its spending on bonuses and incentives, branding the effort as a “stimulus.” In March, Uber said drivers in New York City earned a median of $37.44 per hour. But once the supply of driver recovers, Uber’s wages will most likely fall. The founders of the Drivers Cooperative said members of the group struggled to keep up with their expenses when they earned typical ride-hail wages. A spokeswoman for Lyft, Julie Wood, said, “We’re constantly working to improve the driver experience on our platform and share the goals of allowing drivers to work efficiently and independently.” A spokesman for Uber declined to comment on the cooperatives. The economic stress caused by the pandemic has prodded workers to use cooperatives as a lever against existing companies and — they hope — to increase their pay, said Ariana R. Levinson, a professor at the University of Louisville’s Brandeis School of Law who studies employee ownership. Although it is challenging for gig workers to organize, Ms. Levinson said they had formed small food delivery and ride-hailing cooperatives. “Independent contractors are really successfully using the co-op model to organize themselves and be able to compete for a living wage,” she said. “I’ve never seen this hunger for change that exists with drivers. Every single transaction reveals exploitation,” said Erik Forman, a labor organizer and a founder of the Drivers Cooperative. “They feel like a way to regain control is to have control and ownership over the platform.” Mr. Forman started the cooperative with Alissa Orlando, a former head of operations for Uber’s business in East Africa, and Ken Lewis, a black-car driver in New York City. Ms. Orlando said she had left Uber after witnessing driver outcry over pay reductions. She started researching cooperatives during the pandemic as Uber and Lyft drivers struggled to gain access to unemployment insurance and adequate protective gear. Mr. Lewis and his brother worked in the taxi and black-car industry, but he said they had dreamed about running their own business. The Drivers Cooperative gets technical and business assistance from volunteers in the tech industry, Ms. Orlando said. The cooperative aims to raise pay for drivers, and to address other common concerns, like predatory loan rates and surprise deactivations, which cut them off the apps that connect them with passengers. The group is teaming up with the Lower East Side People’s Federal Credit Union to help drivers refinance their vehicle loans, an effort it hopes will further reduce their expenses. In 2017, Uber agreed to a $20 million penalty with the Federal Trade Commission to settle claims that it misrepresented driver earnings and loan terms. The company no longer offers vehicle financing. Drivers said they would most likely continue to drive for gig companies or black-car services in addition to the Drivers Cooperative, adding it to the array of ride-hailing and delivery apps on their phones. “Working with Uber has been something you do because you don’t have another alternative,” said Michael Ugwu, who has driven for Uber for six years. He said he would continue driving for Uber, but would give priority to customers who requested rides through the cooperative’s app. “Having your own business is the way forward and the way out,” Mr. Ugwu said. “Even if I make less money, I will focus on the co-op to make sure we succeed.” Other groups of workers are also turning to cooperatives to exert more influence in the gig economy. The Driver’s Seat Cooperative, which incorporated in 2019 and operates primarily in Denver, Los Angeles and Portland, Ore., helps drivers harvest industry data about which ride and delivery apps are the most lucrative, and keeps an independent record of their earnings. “The starting point for this was hearing drivers’ frustrations and their sense of being manipulated by the algorithm,” said Hays Witt, the chief executive of Driver’s Seat. “Data is reported back to drivers in different ways on each platform. Drivers have a hard time evaluating what works best for them.” Mr. Witt said Driver’s Seat aimed to sell congestion and traffic data to cities, which get little transparency from gig companies about their environmental impacts. The cooperative also plans to open membership to drivers this year. “People are trying to figure out: ‘How do we hold on to the value that we’re generating and pivot away from this superextractive model?’” Mr. Witt said. “It’s popping up because there’s a real problem, and co-ops offer a real solution.” Mr. Lewis, a founder of the Drivers Cooperative, said drivers like him had wanted to create apps like Uber since it was introduced, but did not know where to start. Although a few efforts have sprung up across the country, like the delivery co-op LoCo, New York did not have a place for them to go. “Drivers would be saying, ‘Why couldn’t we do this by ourselves?’” Mr. Lewis said. When the opportunity to join a cooperative came along, he thought: “We’ve struggled with no change. Let me give this one last effort.” Source link Orbem News #compete #Cooperative #Lyft #Uber #WorkerOwned

[koliasa]

Uber’s Union Deal in the UK Doesn’t Mean Its Battles Are Over

https://koliasa.com/ubers-union-deal-in-the-uk-doesnt-mean-its-battles-are-over/ Uber’s Union Deal in the UK Doesn’t Mean Its Battles Are Over - https://koliasa.com/ubers-union-deal-in-the-uk-doesnt-mean-its-battles-are-over/ The App Drivers & Couriers Union (ADCU), ...