The Issue
The 2021 supreme court decision in the Uber case has been widely reported as having significant consequences for gig economy workers, a description that incidentally has no place in construction – we have campaigned long and hard to distinguish skilled, autonomous, qualified self-employed construction tradespeople from mini-cab drivers, or for that matter kids on mopeds delivering Pizza! However, there is without doubt implications for both contractors who use self-employed tradespeople, and the workers themselves from the guidance the SC gives in the case.
Whilst there is almost nothing new in the judgement, the SC strengthens and reiterates the current policy to the lower courts that they should, as a matter of course look beyond the terms of a written contract (in the employment field only) to ensure the working reality is a direct reflection of the written terms of the contract. Back in January 2018 we commented on the issue saying that “if it waddles like a Duck, Quacks like a Duck and swims on a pond – it’s probably a Duck!”, and that is pretty much what the supreme court means by their guidance, (but not, sadly, in those words) -So If your ways of working are most reflective of an employment relationship, you cannot hide behind the terms of a self-employed contract.
The Risk
In the absence of separate processes, policies and working practices it would have been impossible for the client to defend against the argument that, as there was no difference in the working practices on site, all tradespeople are in fact employees.
The Solution
Engage EEBS for the supply of your sub-contract labour. After a full review of your working practices, we will implement guidance, practices and contracts that will steer you clear of the pitfalls.
