Do not forget the VAT
| Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| Self employed or not http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=36725 |
Page 1 of 6 |
| Author: | perry [ Wed Mar 10, 2021 6:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Self employed or not |
I have a driver working my second Hackney cab. He works on a commission percentage. Its his responsibility to generate his own work from the ranks while i also feed him work from phone. So his driving my cab with my business name on it and i pay for the diesel and running costs. So does this put me in the same boat as uber I have been told as its a Hackney carriage its his responsibility to generate his own work he can still work as a self-employed driver nothing will change |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Wed Mar 10, 2021 7:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
Quote: So does this put me in the same boat as uber I think it would be hard to show that he is a worker, but it depends on your working relationship with the driver. Let's look at the 5 reasons the Justices gave out. 1. You don't control what he charges (as a hackney that's down to the council). Or do you have set fares for your phone customers that the driver must adhere too? 2. You do have a contract (maybe unwritten) that he must pay you a % of his take, but is that contract imposed on the driver or is it an agreement that both parties enter freely? 3. I'm guessing the driver is free to refuse any work that he chooses too, within the laws. What happens if he refuses to take any phone work from you? If there is no penalty then you should be ok with that one. 4. I'm also guessing you have no control over the way he delivers his service. In that I'm assuming any complaints should go to the council for them to look into, rather than you getting involved. What would happen if you get a complaint from one of the customers that have rung you and you pass on the job to the driver? If you consider dealing with the complaint yourself then you are asserting a level of control. If you pass the details to the council then you are not. 5. If the driver said to one of your phone customers 'here is my number don't bother ringing Mr Perry' would you take issue with that? If you do then that is asserting a level of control. |
|
| Author: | grandad [ Wed Mar 10, 2021 7:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
One of the main tests as to if you are self employed or an employee is "tools of the trade" If you provide the tools of the trade, in this case, the car, the fuel, the insurance etc then in my opinion you are employing him. just my view. In my business we provide the car, the fuel and insurance and our drivers are employed by the company. |
|
| Author: | edders23 [ Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
So if you were say a courier and you hired a van complete with insurance etc off a van hire company are you working for them ? Pete you supply the drivers with 100% of the work in this situation I assume that the rank work amounts to the largest share I must admit I am wary of split purse deals in normal times where I supply the vehicle it is on a straight rental basis at the moment I am charging insurance only. The big difference to Uber is the driver can chooses where to take work from and is not tied to company work only |
|
| Author: | perry [ Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
I would roughly say 50% of the work is from the ranks the other is from the phone. He also covers work from other companies when they get stuck with a job they can't cover. Some of the private hire companies in my town supply the car and pay all the running cost and the only work they do is from the data head which is fitted in the cab. And get paid a commission. They might be in the same boat as uber. But generally a Hackney carriage would normally work the ranks which i have no control over. Seems to be mixed views on this |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
edders23 wrote: So if you were say a courier and you hired a van complete with insurance etc off a van hire company are you working for them ? Again it's down to the 5 reasons. I'm guessing in the above scenario the courier will have no say over the rate he can charge, and he will have no ability to make his own relationships/contracts with the punters. So in the above case I would say yes he is a worker. |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
Quote: Seems to be mixed views on this Supreme Court didn't have any mixed views, and their views are the ones that matter. |
|
| Author: | perry [ Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
Yes no mixed views in ubers case Question was will it apply to Hackney carriages |
|
| Author: | perry [ Wed Mar 10, 2021 9:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
If his seating number 1 on rank he can and will normally will turn a phone job down and take his chances off the rank. Unless this been seating there to long without a job When his working the rank i have no control over want he does |
|
| Author: | grandad [ Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
edders23 wrote: So if you were say a courier and you hired a van complete with insurance etc off a van hire company are you working for them ? No, because this chap is not hiring the vehicle. He is paying a percentage of his take. If you are hiring a vehicle you would normally have a hire agreement. And there is an even greater difference between this and UBER. All UBER drivers OWN their own vehicle, they are not provided by UBER. |
|
| Author: | MR T [ Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
Do not forget the VAT
|
|
| Author: | edders23 [ Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
MR T wrote: Do not forget the VAT Indeed many larger PH firms use self employment to reduce their VAT bill |
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Thu Mar 11, 2021 1:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
edders23 wrote: MR T wrote: Do not forget the VAT Indeed many larger PH firms use self employment to reduce their VAT bill then dont issue a VAT receipt (or any receipt) for rents if the driver IS registered S/E his accounts need those or HE is liable for the tax Checking if they’re exempt from PAYE Someone is probably self-employed and shouldn’t be paid through PAYE if most of the following are true: they’re in business for themselves, are responsible for the success or failure of their business and can make a loss or a profit they can decide what work they do and when, where or how to do it they can hire someone else to do the work they’re responsible for fixing any unsatisfactory work in their own time their employer agrees a fixed price for their work - it doesn’t depend on how long the job takes to finish they use their own money to buy business assets, cover running costs, and provide tools and equipment for their work they can work for more than one client |
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Thu Mar 11, 2021 1:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
I rent my car off the wife for £12,000 a year 
|
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Thu Mar 11, 2021 7:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Self employed or not |
Read two articles today in PHTM in relation to the Supreme Court judgement and the effect it may or may not have on sections of the trade. The first one was from a board member of the NPHA. https://content.yudu.com/web/43sy4/0A43 ... gin=reader The author states right at the beginning that this ruling will not effect drivers working on traditional operators, and then doesn't give any reasons as to why he believes that.  The second article was from a rep of the GMB. https://content.yudu.com/web/43sy4/0A43 ... gin=reader In that article the author, writing in a personal capacity, states that he believes the judgement will not effect most traditional taxi firms unless they follow the Uber model. In all fairness he at least gives reasons as to why he believes that. Both of them are wrong.  They are both assuming that because Uber take the fare, process the fare, and then pay drivers less a commission, that in itself is why the court deemed Uber drivers to be 'workers'. No where in the judgement does it say anything like that. The way drivers were remunerated wasn't an issue, control of the driver and control of the way the driver worked were the issues. |
|
| Page 1 of 6 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|