7 ms·

DPD courier who was fined for day off to see doctor dies from diabetes

84 points by techterrier 9y ago

fian 9y ago
DPD is wholly owned by La Poste which is 73% owned by the French government. Seems ironic that a company owned by a government with strong social welfare and laws preventing long work hours would act in such a hostile way towards staff in pursuit of profits.
- SideburnsOfDoom 9y ago
  > which is 73% owned by the French government. As has been remarked, the long-term effect of privatisation in the UK has been that much of the economy is still government-owned. It's just not the UK government that owns it any more.
  - lozenge 9y ago
    DPD has always been a private company.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 9y ago
      There are other companies in the Delivery space, for instance The Royal Mail, also a privately owned company now.
    - lordfoom 9y ago
      A private company owned by the French Government, no?
  - isolli 9y ago
    True. RATP (the French, state-owned public transport operator) runs many bus lines in London. And EDF (the French, state-owned utility) owns EDF Energy in the UK. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_United_Busways https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_United_Busways https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EDF_Energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EDF_Energy
prepend 9y ago
This is a tragic story for the delivery person. Obviously, DPD could change to employees and offer sick leave. But I think the bigger opportunity would be for DPD to add more requirements on their independent contractors to require that they offer sick leave or participate in health savings accounts that can cover these types of fines. The tragedy here is that the company that employed this driver wasn’t able to pay 150 pounds and instead worked the driver into a grave. I’m not sure if the company is just the driver himself as a one person company (pretty common in the US, not sure about UK). A big risk in contracting is not setting enough aside to pay for benefits and taxes. In the programming space I’ve ran into people who were happy as well as stressed out based on how they structured their cash flow management and set asides for benefits. I had two peers with the same rate ($70/hour x 40/week). One worked out a salary, set aside IRA, healthcare, taxes, vacation. The other just paid out the gross amount and was very stressed about company holidays, vacation and even routine healthcare expenses. It was curious how they functioned like an employee and didn’t have an advisor to help them structure their company. We all sat in the same room and were all 30 year old single people.
- lozenge 9y ago
  Yes, he's a one person company (known as self-employed status in the UK). Yeah, DPD could raise their requirements (or the government could force them to) but they would have to raise their prices, and capitalism says they mustn't do that. In the UK we've decided nobody should have to choose between seeing a doctor and paying their rent, hence Statutory Sick Pay. An employer can't fine you for sickness. Unfortunately DPD found a way around it with some legal fiction.
  - martinald 9y ago
    SSP is £90/week. That won't cover most people's rent...
  - prepend 9y ago
    Capitalism doesn’t require not incurring costs for benefits. I’m not sure what your point is. Capitalism infers markets with competitors trying to maximize efficiencies. The US, UPS is the largest and most profitable delivery service. And they have high benefit payouts and a strong employee union. They have higher costs and are more profitable than their closest competitor that uses contract labor. I think it’s overly simple to say capitalism says this is the way it should be. But it’s certainly not pushing UPS to cut employee benefits, mainly because employee benefits from-improved by those benefits- are a competitive advantage.
sneak 9y ago
This happened in the UK, where the government provides you with unemployment benefits and being homeless is basically impossible if you are of sound mind. The man chose to go to work while sick instead of going to the doctor. Let’s not displace the blame for the man’s own choices.
- kylell 9y ago
  maybe he didn't had £150 for another fine, you don't need to be that smart to see the conditions are as restrictive as being employed, wear uniform, can't work for another carrier, etc. fines, etc. yet you're classified as contractor and get no benefits. Is clear an abuse from the company, you trying to blame the victim, is disgraceful.
- TuringTest 9y ago
  Yeah, because the £150 charge for going to the doctor had nothing to do in influencing the man's choices. /s
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- smt88 9y ago
  > being homeless is basically impossible if you are of sound mind So everyone should be OK with the bare minimum of living standards? Just because you won't be on the street doesn't mean you'll be safe, comfortable, and happy. > The man chose to go to work It's easy for someone with lots of choices to look at someone else and assume they also have choices. Old people live in terror of losing their source of income. They're essentially unemployable, so they end up doing some of the worst jobs that are available.
- DanBC 9y ago
  If you become intentionally unemployed there's a delay before you get any money. If you're in a Universal Credit area there's a minimum 6 week delay before you get any money. > being homeless is basically impossible if you are of sound mind. This is horseshit.
mschuster91 9y ago
I fear that there won't be regulation against the "gig economy" as politicians are way too bought out by the big companies profiting from it... and as there will always be someone desperate enough to take even the most rotten, most underpaid job, even collective action (aka strikes) won't help. The only thing that will help for sure is, I am afraid, massive amounts of riots.
- thinkingemote 9y ago
  Riots generally don't help, but I can understand the sentiment if you have lost all hope in the political system. Beware though, you might be advocating for murder, property damage, more corruption and misery, in the hope of alleviating it. Also be aware that most polical riots do not get organized as riots, rather they are political demonstrations which turn into riots. Also know that rioters in the state of rioting are not hoping for something better. In the same way as a strike is the last resort and an indication that negotiations in business has failed, so a riot is a failure. Never want one.
  - dalbasal 9y ago
    They're not the most reliable or efficient method, but I wouldn't say riots can't affect any change. Going back to the 19th-20th century labour movements, rioting sometimes had a leading role in the creation of labour laws, the ones being skirted here. But I disagree with the OP. I think better standards will emerge. Some level of organised political action would probably do it, but I think Uber drivers and gig-couriers don't identify enough as a group to organise and make political demands. What we actually need in most places is better categories for on-demand, casual and piecemeal work. Employers are often willing to pay a premium for low commitment employment terms, via 3rd party HR firms/contracts. Put that money towards regulated protections instead, pension and unemployment insurance. Gig arrangements aren't inherently bad, they are just not regulated/legislated well.
    - mschuster91 9y ago
      > Some level of organised political action would probably do it, but I think Uber drivers and gig-couriers don't identify enough as a group to organise and make political demands. The problem is: Once the gig workers go to strike, the employing companies will either cut their hours/parcels/whatever or terminate them outright on the spot and take the next desperate person into their racket as replacement. And as long as there is a large enough pool of desperate people willing to do any kind of job for virtually no pay this race to the bottom will continue.
thisisit 9y ago
> The company’s system of charging drivers if they cannot cover their round has been described as appalling by the chairman of the House of Commons’ work and pensions committee, Frank Field. This sounds stupid. Wasn't the whole point of gig economy to setting personal time, working and getting paid only when the work is done?
- rsynnott 9y ago
  The point of the "gig economy" is to get around regulation by pretending that your employees are contractors. See also, AirBnB (for getting around planning/zoning regulations), Uber (for getting around employment, taxi, etc regulation), etc etc. There exists a whole business sector devoted to trying to bypass regulation.
- smt88 9y ago
  > Wasn't the whole point of gig economy to setting personal time, working and getting paid only when the work is done? That's the gig companies' marketing, not their intention. The intention was to get cheap, disposable labor. In the US and other developed countries, an employee has a lot of rights and an employer has lots of responsibilities, so under-paying and firing employees is pretty difficult to do. If a business model only works if you under-pay and mistreat workers, someone (e.g. Fedex, Uber, US govt, and even Microsoft) will fin a way around it by misclassifying employees as contractors.
  - jdmichal 9y ago
    Firing employees is relatively easy in many US states. At a minimum, all the "at will" states. Firing people and not having to play unemployment is difficult, because it requires a legally-relevant cause.
- dunk010 9y ago
  Isn't the whole point of this article to show that that is not how it works out in practice?
- viraptor 9y ago
  Wasn't the point of communism that there is no privileged class and the dictator power is given up post-revolution? Theory and promises meet the real world...
gaius 9y ago
deliver parcels to restricted time slots, must wear a uniform, hire a DPD liveried van and not work for any other courier company If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
- rovek 9y ago
  Right. This isn't gig economy, it's a huge company's intentionally abusive contracts
  - gaius 9y ago
    And the sad thing is, I only trust DPD as a company because my local DPD guy is really good, and since he had the van and the uniform I assumed he was an employee like he would be with say Fedex.
    - smt88 9y ago
      > I assumed he was an employee like he would be with say Fedex Hate to break it to you about Fedex... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-fedex-settlement/fedex-to-settle-driver-lawsuits-in-20-states-for-240-million-idUSKCN0Z229Q https://www.reuters.com/article/us-fedex-settlement/fedex-to...
      - gaius 9y ago
        I thought that was all settled now? Or maybe I misremembered, I had the association of “FedEx” and “employee” in my mind...
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
parthibanr52 9y ago
Great post!
carlmr 9y ago
>MPs and unions have argued that these strict conditions mean they are bogusly self-employed and should be treated as employed workers. This is why I'm happy Germany banned Uber from operating here. I'd love to have more competition in the taxi market (which is ridiculously expensive here). But not at the cost of millions of workers. We need regulation against Bogus self-employment to be enforced. A person who can only work for one company is not self-employed. At the very least we need gig economy companies to compete for the labor force to ensure that market rates go up.
- aianus 9y ago
  I drive for Uber part time and I don't feel the self-employed contractor classification to be 'bogus' at all. I use my own equipment, set my own hours, perform tasks with autonomy (I can choose whatever route I or the rider wants) and have no supervision. I can also work for Lyft simultaneously if I want.
  - gaius 9y ago
    You may be willing to waive your own rights, hard-won on your behalf, but there is an externality. Just as a person who chooses not to vaccinate affects not only themselves but lowers “herd immunity” for everyone.
    - Gracana 9y ago
      Like a union strike-breaker. The group has less bargaining power if there are people who will work anyway.
  - tabeth 9y ago
    Can you set your own prices?
    - carlmr 9y ago
      Bingo!
    - 9y ago
DoreenMichele 9y ago
I think the dystopian future we have all been fearing has officially arrived. Ugh.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
dodge 9y ago
Please look at guardian or Google holiday pay for contract workers. I'm and ej court all ruled holiday pay should be given to contract workers after test case involving double glazing salesman. It is covered by HEALTH in health and safety. All it needs is someone to take these profit driven companies to task..hiding behind so called self employment.
dodge 9y ago
Building contractors are paid pro rata holiday pay for duration of a contract. Gig workers get nothing..its not the work with long hours...its the fact no one can work without holidays.

84 points by techterrier 9y ago

fian 9y ago

DPD is wholly owned by La Poste which is 73% owned by the French government. Seems ironic that a company owned by a government with strong social welfare and laws preventing long work hours would act in such a hostile way towards staff in pursuit of profits.

SideburnsOfDoom 9y ago
> which is 73% owned by the French government. As has been remarked, the long-term effect of privatisation in the UK has been that much of the economy is still government-owned. It's just not the UK government that owns it any more.
- lozenge 9y ago
  DPD has always been a private company.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 9y ago
    There are other companies in the Delivery space, for instance The Royal Mail, also a privately owned company now.
  - lordfoom 9y ago
    A private company owned by the French Government, no?
- isolli 9y ago
  True. RATP (the French, state-owned public transport operator) runs many bus lines in London. And EDF (the French, state-owned utility) owns EDF Energy in the UK. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_United_Busways https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_United_Busways https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EDF_Energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EDF_Energy

prepend 9y ago

This is a tragic story for the delivery person. Obviously, DPD could change to employees and offer sick leave. But I think the bigger opportunity would be for DPD to add more requirements on their independent contractors to require that they offer sick leave or participate in health savings accounts that can cover these types of fines. The tragedy here is that the company that employed this driver wasn’t able to pay 150 pounds and instead worked the driver into a grave. I’m not sure if the company is just the driver himself as a one person company (pretty common in the US, not sure about UK). A big risk in contracting is not setting enough aside to pay for benefits and taxes. In the programming space I’ve ran into people who were happy as well as stressed out based on how they structured their cash flow management and set asides for benefits. I had two peers with the same rate ($70/hour x 40/week). One worked out a salary, set aside IRA, healthcare, taxes, vacation. The other just paid out the gross amount and was very stressed about company holidays, vacation and even routine healthcare expenses. It was curious how they functioned like an employee and didn’t have an advisor to help them structure their company. We all sat in the same room and were all 30 year old single people.

lozenge 9y ago
Yes, he's a one person company (known as self-employed status in the UK). Yeah, DPD could raise their requirements (or the government could force them to) but they would have to raise their prices, and capitalism says they mustn't do that. In the UK we've decided nobody should have to choose between seeing a doctor and paying their rent, hence Statutory Sick Pay. An employer can't fine you for sickness. Unfortunately DPD found a way around it with some legal fiction.
- martinald 9y ago
  SSP is £90/week. That won't cover most people's rent...
- prepend 9y ago
  Capitalism doesn’t require not incurring costs for benefits. I’m not sure what your point is. Capitalism infers markets with competitors trying to maximize efficiencies. The US, UPS is the largest and most profitable delivery service. And they have high benefit payouts and a strong employee union. They have higher costs and are more profitable than their closest competitor that uses contract labor. I think it’s overly simple to say capitalism says this is the way it should be. But it’s certainly not pushing UPS to cut employee benefits, mainly because employee benefits from-improved by those benefits- are a competitive advantage.

sneak 9y ago

This happened in the UK, where the government provides you with unemployment benefits and being homeless is basically impossible if you are of sound mind. The man chose to go to work while sick instead of going to the doctor. Let’s not displace the blame for the man’s own choices.

kylell 9y ago
maybe he didn't had £150 for another fine, you don't need to be that smart to see the conditions are as restrictive as being employed, wear uniform, can't work for another carrier, etc. fines, etc. yet you're classified as contractor and get no benefits. Is clear an abuse from the company, you trying to blame the victim, is disgraceful.
TuringTest 9y ago
Yeah, because the £150 charge for going to the doctor had nothing to do in influencing the man's choices. /s
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
smt88 9y ago
> being homeless is basically impossible if you are of sound mind So everyone should be OK with the bare minimum of living standards? Just because you won't be on the street doesn't mean you'll be safe, comfortable, and happy. > The man chose to go to work It's easy for someone with lots of choices to look at someone else and assume they also have choices. Old people live in terror of losing their source of income. They're essentially unemployable, so they end up doing some of the worst jobs that are available.
DanBC 9y ago
If you become intentionally unemployed there's a delay before you get any money. If you're in a Universal Credit area there's a minimum 6 week delay before you get any money. > being homeless is basically impossible if you are of sound mind. This is horseshit.

mschuster91 9y ago

I fear that there won't be regulation against the "gig economy" as politicians are way too bought out by the big companies profiting from it... and as there will always be someone desperate enough to take even the most rotten, most underpaid job, even collective action (aka strikes) won't help. The only thing that will help for sure is, I am afraid, massive amounts of riots.

thinkingemote 9y ago
Riots generally don't help, but I can understand the sentiment if you have lost all hope in the political system. Beware though, you might be advocating for murder, property damage, more corruption and misery, in the hope of alleviating it. Also be aware that most polical riots do not get organized as riots, rather they are political demonstrations which turn into riots. Also know that rioters in the state of rioting are not hoping for something better. In the same way as a strike is the last resort and an indication that negotiations in business has failed, so a riot is a failure. Never want one.
- dalbasal 9y ago
  They're not the most reliable or efficient method, but I wouldn't say riots can't affect any change. Going back to the 19th-20th century labour movements, rioting sometimes had a leading role in the creation of labour laws, the ones being skirted here. But I disagree with the OP. I think better standards will emerge. Some level of organised political action would probably do it, but I think Uber drivers and gig-couriers don't identify enough as a group to organise and make political demands. What we actually need in most places is better categories for on-demand, casual and piecemeal work. Employers are often willing to pay a premium for low commitment employment terms, via 3rd party HR firms/contracts. Put that money towards regulated protections instead, pension and unemployment insurance. Gig arrangements aren't inherently bad, they are just not regulated/legislated well.
  - mschuster91 9y ago
    > Some level of organised political action would probably do it, but I think Uber drivers and gig-couriers don't identify enough as a group to organise and make political demands. The problem is: Once the gig workers go to strike, the employing companies will either cut their hours/parcels/whatever or terminate them outright on the spot and take the next desperate person into their racket as replacement. And as long as there is a large enough pool of desperate people willing to do any kind of job for virtually no pay this race to the bottom will continue.

thisisit 9y ago

> The company’s system of charging drivers if they cannot cover their round has been described as appalling by the chairman of the House of Commons’ work and pensions committee, Frank Field. This sounds stupid. Wasn't the whole point of gig economy to setting personal time, working and getting paid only when the work is done?

rsynnott 9y ago
The point of the "gig economy" is to get around regulation by pretending that your employees are contractors. See also, AirBnB (for getting around planning/zoning regulations), Uber (for getting around employment, taxi, etc regulation), etc etc. There exists a whole business sector devoted to trying to bypass regulation.
smt88 9y ago
> Wasn't the whole point of gig economy to setting personal time, working and getting paid only when the work is done? That's the gig companies' marketing, not their intention. The intention was to get cheap, disposable labor. In the US and other developed countries, an employee has a lot of rights and an employer has lots of responsibilities, so under-paying and firing employees is pretty difficult to do. If a business model only works if you under-pay and mistreat workers, someone (e.g. Fedex, Uber, US govt, and even Microsoft) will fin a way around it by misclassifying employees as contractors.
- jdmichal 9y ago
  Firing employees is relatively easy in many US states. At a minimum, all the "at will" states. Firing people and not having to play unemployment is difficult, because it requires a legally-relevant cause.
dunk010 9y ago
Isn't the whole point of this article to show that that is not how it works out in practice?
viraptor 9y ago
Wasn't the point of communism that there is no privileged class and the dictator power is given up post-revolution? Theory and promises meet the real world...

gaius 9y ago

deliver parcels to restricted time slots, must wear a uniform, hire a DPD liveried van and not work for any other courier company If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

rovek 9y ago
Right. This isn't gig economy, it's a huge company's intentionally abusive contracts
- gaius 9y ago
  And the sad thing is, I only trust DPD as a company because my local DPD guy is really good, and since he had the van and the uniform I assumed he was an employee like he would be with say Fedex.
  - smt88 9y ago
    > I assumed he was an employee like he would be with say Fedex Hate to break it to you about Fedex... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-fedex-settlement/fedex-to-settle-driver-lawsuits-in-20-states-for-240-million-idUSKCN0Z229Q https://www.reuters.com/article/us-fedex-settlement/fedex-to...
    - gaius 9y ago
      I thought that was all settled now? Or maybe I misremembered, I had the association of “FedEx” and “employee” in my mind...
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

parthibanr52 9y ago

Great post!

carlmr 9y ago

>MPs and unions have argued that these strict conditions mean they are bogusly self-employed and should be treated as employed workers. This is why I'm happy Germany banned Uber from operating here. I'd love to have more competition in the taxi market (which is ridiculously expensive here). But not at the cost of millions of workers. We need regulation against Bogus self-employment to be enforced. A person who can only work for one company is not self-employed. At the very least we need gig economy companies to compete for the labor force to ensure that market rates go up.

aianus 9y ago
I drive for Uber part time and I don't feel the self-employed contractor classification to be 'bogus' at all. I use my own equipment, set my own hours, perform tasks with autonomy (I can choose whatever route I or the rider wants) and have no supervision. I can also work for Lyft simultaneously if I want.
- gaius 9y ago
  You may be willing to waive your own rights, hard-won on your behalf, but there is an externality. Just as a person who chooses not to vaccinate affects not only themselves but lowers “herd immunity” for everyone.
  - Gracana 9y ago
    Like a union strike-breaker. The group has less bargaining power if there are people who will work anyway.
- tabeth 9y ago
  Can you set your own prices?
  - carlmr 9y ago
    Bingo!
  - 9y ago

DoreenMichele 9y ago

I think the dystopian future we have all been fearing has officially arrived. Ugh.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

dodge 9y ago

Please look at guardian or Google holiday pay for contract workers. I'm and ej court all ruled holiday pay should be given to contract workers after test case involving double glazing salesman. It is covered by HEALTH in health and safety. All it needs is someone to take these profit driven companies to task..hiding behind so called self employment.

dodge 9y ago

Building contractors are paid pro rata holiday pay for duration of a contract. Gig workers get nothing..its not the work with long hours...its the fact no one can work without holidays.