"Robin9" wrote in message
...

I admit I'm surprised.

me too

It's so patently obvious to TPTB that being a cab driver is a self
employment that Uber must have done some pretty dumb things to get a ruling
otherwise.

The variable costs of an owner operated vehicle and the number of hours that
you might have to spend waiting for a pick up make coming up with a
guaranteed minimum wage, after expenses for all hours on shift, just
impossible. You would end up subsidising those drivers working in slack
parts of the town, from the earnings of drivers in the busy parts of town.
The hard working, busy, drivers ain't gonna like that one bit.


When the GMB Union announced
they intended to bring a Court case against Uber for
denying GMB members normal workers' rights, I thought
GMB had no chance. Clearly, I was wrong:

The GMB are happy about this because it makes their parallel claims against
the "employers" of couriers drivers a slam dunk. Claims which IMHO are far
more well founded that that of cab drivers. And much more founded on the
employer taking advantage of the worker argument, than Uber does.

But I don't think that they have done the prospective taxi drivers any
favours.

One of three things will happen he
Uber will re-tweak their contact to make it one of SE,
they will have to take all of the employee management on board, owing and
renting-back cars, and giving people defined shifts to work,
or walk away from the UK.

Only the first benefits the type of person minded to do cabbing as a add on
to some other job. How many people are going to do cabbing as a casual job
if they are told exactly which shifts they must work?


http://tinyurl.com/hetcmef

I suspect this will have more impact on those minicab firms
who cater solely for the account market and who insist their
drivers work stipulated hours, wear suits and ties, and drive
the cab firm's own cars.

Surely this type of work is pre-booked. It doesn't have all of the problems
of having to pay staff for "waiting around" for the next ride. It will be
trivial for companies offering this service to work within this ruling.

I've always wondered why HMRC
went along with the idea that those drivers were self-employed.

Ah, you misunderstand.

The rules has not said that they are employees subject to PAYE. It has said
that they are "workers".

For tax purposes they are still self employed.

Apart from when wearing their hat as the enforcement authority for NMW, HMRC
have no interest in the difference ruled upon here.

tim