heathcote wrote:
roythebus wrote:
I've posted an update on the appeal court case on the Court Case database section, it makes interesting reading and could have wide implications for the taxi trade.
Uber announced it was supplying certain in work benefits for its drivers and they clearly fall foul of this judgement,a uber driver cannot substitute another driver to do the booking as the subcontract deregulation's state it can only be an operator who can subcontract,same will apply to all other private hire vehicles country wide unless they are the holder of a private hire operator license personally.
Not a holder of a private hire operators license,you are without doubt an employee of the private hire operator you are with.
What about partnerships, My wifes a Business partner in my small operation, she is not an employee, can I pass a run on to here as she's as much the owner operator as I am!
Or is it the likes of Uber who subcontract work to the so called self employed drive that they mean, or possibly employees of the those subcontractor that ubers referred the work to.