Uk Mail Driver Who Was Unable To Work After Car Accident Charged £800

[mikey4444]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/19/uk-mail-driver-unable-to-work-car-accident-charged-800-pounds

Does anybody think this is just and fair ? This chap was injured as a result of a car accident while on duty.

But his employer charged him £800 for the injury !

[fiction-factory]

Er, yes. Provided they are operated properly zero hours contarcts are an excellent idea as they suit those who like flexibility (eg students who want to work when it suits them). Would I have taken one when i was bringinging up a family and paying a big mortgage-probably not. Does it suit me now- certainly does. It frees me from the slavery of a permanent full time job-maybe having to work even when i have other things I need to do

[Old_Geezer]

Zero hours is a particular type of contract and should be illegal. It's requirement that you're on call to the company only, who won't pay you until they have something, is abuse. If people want flexible working then that's what temp agencies are for. Zero hours is comparable to the time when employees were not considered worthy of value, and employers could simply choose on whim from those desperate for work at the company gate, each morning. Society is supposed to have got past that sort of attitude.

[fiction-factory]

>Oh, and yes, many of us on the left would outlaw such anti-working-class shackles.
Are you sure that's what you meant? The shackles were removed when i moved from employed to a zero hours contact

[Old_Geezer]

I don't thing NJ ignored the question. He explained why, whilst it would have been unfair to an employee, it's not to a contractor who agreed to provide a service and for whatever reason, didn't. The onus was on the contractor to cover eventualities.

[Old_Geezer]

THINK
Like I typed !

[Samjenko]

But you must have been forced at gunpoint, ff. ;-)

[fiction-factory]

Well if people misunderstand it I can't do much about that. I am talking about the type where I can have several employers, There are many who do want the flexibility that some would want to deny us. Doesn't suit everyone- those it doesn't suit can look for an employed job. There is room for agencies, zero hours contacts, part time and full time roles

[bhg481]

Surely "temping" is zero hours contract OG? When my wife was temping she only got paid when they found her a company to go and work for for a short period.
My grandson has a zero-hours contract with a company - if he wants work he rings them; if they have work they ring him. It suits him fine as he's in a music group and can work when there's no gigs on.

[New Judge]

“UK Mail could just as easily employ this man themselves, but they choose not to do so for financial gain.”

And presumably he chose to provide his services to them for a similar reason.

“What if his injury was life-threatening and/or long term ?”

As has been said, self-employed people should make their own arrangements to ensure they are covered for such eventualities.

“Am I right in thinking that you can't work for only one company and be classed as self-employed? How can they work for any other company when they are on call most of the time? Surely this company is in effect their employer?”

It’s not quite that straightforward, lb. HMRC publishes plenty of guidance on the matter if you want to look it up but I believe that many firms are using “self-employed” people when they should be employees. The Pimlico Plumbers case I mentioned may be the first of many.

So to address the “just and fair” question which I apparently did not do. Yes it is just and fair. The gentleman entered into a contract (which presumably he did not do under duress). He was (or should have been) aware of its terms and conditions. Had he not had an accident he presumably would have been perfectly happy to continue providing his services for UK Mail. It hardly just or fair that he should seek to ignore the terms of the contract just because something happens which puts him at a disadvantage.

[Togo]

Am I wrong in recalling that the BBC are fond of "self employed" hirelings, to reduce their own liabilities? Do they not even go on to issue "guidance" to such down trodden slaves in the arts of tax avoidance and the like?

[EDDIE51]

'Temping' is not a zero hours contract. I 'temp' but I am under no obligation to accept any work. Zero hours means I have to accept any hours offered and can not work for anyone else while I am on the zero hours contract even if they have no work for me.

[bhg481]

Thanks Eddie for pointing out the difference.

[Old_Geezer]

Temping isn't zero hours. You can take jobs from any company with work available and are not under contract to one, who is effectively in control. The agency is simply a deal arranger.

[Old_Geezer]

Ah, I was a little slow returning to this thread, I see.