1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar

The Apprenticeship Levy, has it worked?

The Apprenticeship Levy has now been in force for a year. The government's aim in introducing the Levy was to reverse the decline in the use of apprenticeships by ring fencing funds which would be set aside in order to tackle skills shortages. One year on, has it worked?
Read more »
The Apprenticeship Levy, has it worked?

Government’s response to Taylor Review

Seven months ago, we reported on the Taylor Review of modern working practices, with its focus on “good work” for all that is “fair and decent”. In short, the review recommended extra protection for the UK workforce, ranging from clarity over employment status to extra rights on zero-hours contracts. This month the government has published its eagerly anticipated response to Matthew Taylor’s 53 recommendations.

Read more here.

Government’s response to Taylor Review

The Government’s response to the Taylor Review

The Taylor Review (or, to use its formal title, the Review of Modern Working Practices) was published back in July 2017 and made over 50 recommendations. Renewed media and political interest followed, putting the vexed question of effective and coherent employment rights in the modern workforce back into the spotlight.
Read more »
The Government’s response to the Taylor Review

Managing a flexible workforce

With Christmas on the way (a busy time of year in many sectors – including hospitality) Big Hospitality has published our article on three key ways to manage a flexible workforce.  Please do have a read here – the principles can be applied to other types of flexible workforce too.

Managing a flexible workforce

Uber loses appeal on worker status

In the continuing worker status saga, Uber's recent appeal against the Tribunal ruling that its drivers are workers, rather than self-employed individuals, has been dismissed by the EAT.
Read more »
Uber loses appeal on worker status

People Management article, featuring Michael Bronstein

As you may have seen, People Management recently published an article on some of the big developments in employment law in 2017, particularly Brexit and the Taylor review. The discussion featured Michael Bronstein, a partner here at Dentons. Michael gave some insight on the potential effects of withdrawing from the EU on employment legislation, acknowledging that there is 'a common misconception that all employment rights are created by the EU'. In the lead up to triggering Article 50, the government maintained that there would not be any change to workers' rights following Brexit, so it would be brave to take away key protections, many of which derive from UK law anyway. Other commentators suggested there may be reforms to TUPE, although agreed that it will stay, but perhaps in a slightly amended form. As for a new visa regime for workers, the outcome is unclear. The uncertainty has already caused many workers to leave at a time where we are beginning to see a shortage of labour. This has not been helped by the recent leaked Home Office post-Brexit Immigration Policy which has confirmed the fears of employers with respect to the future of EU workers in the UK.
Read more »
People Management article, featuring Michael Bronstein

Self-employed contractors and the gig economy – keep watching this space!

Pimlico Plumbers has now been granted permission to appeal to the Supreme Court. The decision reached by the Supreme Court will be significant as the highest authority on the employment status of purportedly self-employed contractors. It is likely to have implications for the so-called "gig economy".
Read more »
Self-employed contractors and the gig economy – keep watching this space!

Another triumph for cyclists

Following in the tracks of CitySprint, Deliveroo and Excel, Addison Lee is the latest company to wrongly classify its workforce.
Read more »
Another triumph for cyclists

Gig economy: Couriers delivering emergency blood are workers

In March 2017, five cyclists, motorcyclists and van drivers who carry emergency blood to hospitals and samples to laboratories launched a claim challenging their self-employed status, backed by the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB).

Last week The Doctors Laboratory (TDL) conceded that these five couriers are in fact workers, however notably did not confirm whether they would repay holiday pay owed to the workers. This concession of worker status follows a similar concession by eCourier, which recently admitted to wrongly classifying couriers as self-employed contractors rather than workers.

This is the latest development in the increasing number of gig economy employment status cases. The recent moves by eCourier and TDL in conceding worker status show the momentum that is gathering behind such cases and that companies are now seemingly prepared to pre-empt a tribunal ruling of worker status. The general secretary of IWGB, Jason Moyer-Lee, went as far as saying that it shows that “worker status is an inevitability in the gig economy”. Interestingly IWGB is going to continue its case against TDL and will argue that the couriers are in fact employees, not just workers, in an attempt to secure them the guaranteed additional benefits (such as protection against unfair dismissal) that such a classification would bring.

Gig economy: Couriers delivering emergency blood are workers

The gig economy: “Free-riding on the welfare state”

Due to the calling of a snap general election, the Work and Pensions Committee has curtailed its inquiry and has now published its report on the gig economy and its use of self-employment. The report is somewhat damning of companies that utilise the gig economy model. The report concludes that:

“Self-employment is neither inherently good nor bad. It can represent entrepreneurial zeal and a highly desirable culture of self-reliance. It can also be deeply negative, allowing companies to evade responsibility for their workers’ wellbeing and increase their profits. It is incumbent on Government to close loopholes that incentivise this behaviour.”

The main points that the report raises are:

1. Welfare safety net

Employee status and its corresponding rights help to protect (1) individuals from personal hardship and (2) the welfare state from incurring costs in relation to such individuals. On the other hand, self-employed individuals do not have such rights and therefore neither they nor the welfare state are protected. The report argues that self-employed status is being used to deprive individuals of their rights in the name of “flexibility”, and in doing so companies are refusing to contribute to society by protecting those individuals and by contributing substantially less by way of National Insurance contributions (NICs). This is a vicious circle as NICs then bring in less revenue to the welfare pot but there is a larger demand for support as a result of such pseudo-self-employment.

2. NICs

Our welfare state is founded on the principle that everyone contributes. In the past, self-employed individuals received less support than employees, which is why their NICs were substantially lower. However, the reality today is that access to the services that NICs fund is substantially the same for both the employed and the self-employed. The report therefore recommends that the new government consider how it can equalise NICs to ensure that the welfare pot is sufficiently funded.

3. Low levels of retirement saving by the self-employed should be tackled

The report argues that the current framework does not do enough to encourage self-employed people to save for retirement, which, in turn, increases the likelihood that they will need to depend on the welfare state in the future. This could lead to a welfare state crisis whereby there are not enough funds to meet demand. The report suggests looking at tax reforms to encourage greater contributions to pensions by the self-employed.

4. Assumption of worker status

The report recommends that the default position should be an assumption of worker status. The onus would then be on employers to provide basic rights and benefits (for example, national minimum wage and paid holiday). If they wanted to argue that individuals were self-employed the burden of proof would rest with them rather than the individuals.

5. Encouraging real self-employment

Job centres focus on getting individuals into employment (rather than self-employment). The report suggests that whilst employment may be suitable for most individuals, more support should be available for helping people launch (or re-launch) self-employed careers. This would avoid stifling genuine entrepreneurs and viable new businesses.

It will be interesting to see how the findings of this report and the findings of the upcoming Taylor review of modern working practices compare. However there seems to be increasing pressure on government to ensure that gig economy workers are afforded at least basic rights. This, along with a growing body of case law from the employment tribunal that is critical of the gig economy model, means that employers utilising such a model should start to look at ways to address these problems before they are forced to.

To read the report in full click here.

The gig economy: “Free-riding on the welfare state”