We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
A Court of First Instance of Madrid has ruled, for the first time, that the dealers by Glovo They are not fake freelancers. Based on the proven facts and taking into account the characteristics of the service and the way in which it is provided, the Court has concluded that the “riders " they are self-employed.
There are still few judicial decisions that deal with the provision of services through digital platforms. However, this judicial resolution is in line with the opposite of what is established in the first resolution, issued by the Courts of First Instance of Valencia last June, and in the resolutions of the Labor Inspection.
The aspects The most important that the Court takes into consideration to declare that Glovo distributors are not false self-employed are:
- The APP. He "Rider" You have complete freedom to choose schedules and decide the services to be carried out. As indicated in the Judgment: "There is no record of the submission of the worker to an internal organizational structure of the company." The APP is simply a tool through which services are offered and the end consumer places an order following a computer program. Despite the fact that the APP is the one who selects the delivery person, this work tool is fully compatible with the figure of the self-employed worker;
- Fixing the rates. It is the Glovo merchant that sets the rates, so the distributors do not have the power to change the price, nor can they directly charge consumers in their homes. However, and in relation to this point, the resolution establishes that the setting of rates is not an aspect incompatible with the figure of the self-employed, and that therefore, it cannot be classified as an indication of alienation;
- Media ownership. The "Riders" They own the bicycles and the telephones used to provide the service. And this is an indication, more than that there is no work dependency.
- He risk and luck. The risk of each order is assumed by the dealer himself. Is he "rider " who responds to the client and not Glovo.
In conclusion, the definitions that labor legislation establishes to define the figures of self-employed worker and employed person, need to be adapted to the new work models that are emerging with the advancement of technologies.
Therefore, it will be the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court that will be in charge of establishing doctrine and unifying the labor criteria of these digital platforms (Glovo, Deliveroo, Uber, etc.), which are increasingly on the rise.