Agreement in the platform sector?

Abstract

Agreement in the platform sector? Daniel Blackburn (bio) In the UK, as in much of the world, the rise of the platform economy has been astonishingly fast. Platforms appeared with various approaches to the contracting of labour, but typically these have manifested as a move away from secure, permanent, full-time, and regulated structures towards more precarious models of work, often relying on the idea that their workforces are 'self-employed'. This notion, of self-employment, has been wrapped up with jazzy slogans about 'independent' work, labour 'freedom', and worker 'autonomy', with the 21st Century worker breaking free from the drudgery and grind of the factory or the office, liberated by technology to set their own pace, choose their own hours, and work their own way. Each 'worker' now styled as an autonomous, self-employed, service-provider; the platform merely a technological facilitator, connecting these hundreds of thousands of independent service-providers with a world of restaurants and would-be travellers, customers and consumers. Platforms say they are thus creating the work boom, but not acting as the 'employer' of those working in it. The platform economy has shaken up the world of work but platforms have fiercely resisted efforts to reclassify their 'contractors' as 'workers' That, sceptics have suggested, is just not an accurate description of what is taking place. But even now, when alternative (and more 'typical') employment vacancies are quite high, people do continue to join the platform workforce. Something about it is appealing for those seeking work. There is some acknowledgement from the union side of a need to adapt, and to find a way to work in this new paradigm. But are workers really choosing self-employment, or is it the flexible working arrangements that they are choosing, and which happen to be offered to them on 'take it or leave it' self-employed terms? With very low barriers to entry, and levels of pay and oversight that are incomparable, these new jobs bear little resemblance to the pay and freedom typically enjoyed by the skilled trades that have long been associated with self-employed status. Are these new workers 'liberated' from drudgery, or have they been offered more freedom at the expense of basic employment rights? Contractors or workers? Responding to a mixture of worker pressure, strikes, changes in the regulatory environment, and court rulings, platforms have resisted pressure to change, though making some concessions in the wake of court rulings. The two big legal cases that have defined the sector in the UK both hinged around whether or not the 'self-employed' people driving cars and delivering food for Uber and Deliveroo respectively were actually 'workers', and therefore entitled to a limited set of statutory worker entitlements (which would include holiday pay, sick pay, the minimum wage, and also access to the statutory trade union recognition framework). In a pivotal case1, Uber attempted to resist a challenge to the self-employed status of drivers, loosing at the employment tribunal, and chasing unsuccessful appeals all the way to the Supreme Court. The platform argued that it was not a party to the contract for hire, and was merely a facilitator helping self-employed drivers and customers find one another and make contracts between themselves. The courts were not persuaded, finding that the platform was contracting directly with passengers and engaging drivers to carry out these bookings for it. On the facts, these drivers were 'workers' within s. 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (with implications for a limited range of workplace entitlements and protection, such as the 'living' (minimum) wage, pension provision, and holiday pay). The ruling did not go so far as to require that the platforms should confer 'employee' status, a more substantial change, which would have unlocked further rights at work, such as unfair dismissal protections. Among the factors influencing the court was an obligation on the specific driver to perform work (they were not free to put forward a substitute driver). A subsequent case2, in which Uber again attempted to push the idea that it was a mere facilitator, and not a party to the contract for bookings made between customers and drivers, was firmly rejected, with...