Courier Business Stuff

The owners are financially responsible for the actions of their dog whether it’s on their premises or not. If they’ve got house insurance it will normally have public libility cover built into it. Pet insurance often has PL cover as well. If they’re tenants without insurance then you can still sue them, but you might not recover anything even if you win. If the driver’s an employee then you may need to notify your employer’s liability insurer.
 

Posted under Employment

A leading trade union has accused a firm of acting in the “most uncaring way” after claims a Walthamstow cycle courier was sacked for requesting a day off on Christmas Eve.

The GMB said it will fight for the reinstatement of Paul Whieldon, who said he was told on the phone by a boss at CitySprint that he had lost his job.

GMB official Terry Flanagan said: “The courier business is full of companies like CitySprint, who treat their employees in the most uncaring and unprofessional way.

“We have experienced low standards in the courier industry, but we do not expect workers to be sacked simply for asking for time off over Christmas.”

CitySprint said Mr Whieldon, who worked for the firm for five years, was “no longer engaged” as a sub-contractor, adding: “We decided to end our business relationship with Paul for amongst other matters, performance related issues.

“Selection and retention criteria for cycle couriers are very competitive for what is, in our experience, a highly sought after field.

“We currently have a long waiting list of applicants eager to work with us for this demanding role.”

Copyright (c) Press Association Ltd. 2007, All Rights Reserved.

http://www.hastingsobserver.co.uk/latest-london-news/Courier-39sacked39-over-Christmas-eve.3601367.jp

Posted under Employment

No, don’t ring me Gail. Employment law isn’t my strong point at all and there are a lot of people on here who know far more about it than I do.

A lot would depend on what you were asking him to do (hours etc) and what his contract says. If he’s refusing to carry out his work then I’d have thought that you’re on pretty firm ground if you sack him. I’ve no idea whether you need to give him some sort of a warning first though.
 

Posted under Employment

I can guarantee that it’s nothing whatsoever to do with IR35. IR35 only applies to companies – so the idea that DHL would insist that owner-drivers form companies to avoid IR35 just doesn’t work.

IR35 just applies the same employment tests to service companies as it does to the self-employed and the same get-outs apply. So if you provide your own vehicle and stand to make profits or lose money depending on how you run your business then you/your company avoids looking like an employee. The fact that you work for just one customer is never relevant. Since DHL O/Ds supply their own vehicle, are paid per parcel and are fined for non-deliveries then they pass the self-employed/IR35 tests.

On top of that, as Richard mentions, even if they do none of the above and act and are treated exactly like employees then they can pass the self-employed/IR35 test just by having it written into their contracts that they have the right, or even better the responsibility, to provide a substitute driver whenever they wish.

So unless DHL have the most cautious and/or incompetent lawyers in the world I’m left with the feeling that there’s something else behind this ‘service partner’ concept.

My suspicion is that DHL’s position on this is more about accountability than employment status. They’re too much of a big fish to be able to risk getting caught cutting the corners they need to in order to operate efficiently and profitably. Far better to force their ‘service partners’ to cut the corners for them and then point the finger at these ‘independent companies’ when problems occur. Just my opinion.

Posted under Employment

They can take a company-owned van home without incurring any tax liability. They can even stop off on the way home to buy a pint of milk, or even take a load of rubbish to the tip once or twice a year and still pay nothing extra in tax. If they use the van for any other purpose then the employer has to report the use to HMCR and the employee has their tax code adjusted accordingly.

In a worst case scenario, assuming the employer waits until the end of this tax year to report the benefit to the Revenue, the employee’s tax allowance for 2008/09 could be reduced by £7,000 – costing the employee an extra £30/week in tax.

It’s up to the employer to prove to the Revenue that a van that’s taken home at night isn’t available for the employee’s private use.

Posted under Employment, Vans

In England (and Wales I believe): If the vehicle is EVER used as a workplace by anyone except a single named person, even if there’s only one person at a time in the vehicle, then it’s a smoke-free vehicle.

So if it’s your own vehicle and no-one else EVER drives it for work or sits in it for work then you can smoke in it.

The thick b******s that drafted the legislation put in an exemption to allow you to smoke in your house if people come to repair it but don’t seem to have added the same exemption for vehicles. So in theory your van will be smoke-free if anyone else (RAC, Police, mechanic) has to ever use it as their workplace. That situation will probably be refined by an expensive House of Lords appeal at some time in the future.

In Scotland your van is smoke-free even if no-one else is allowed access to it.

Posted under Employment

In England: It becomes a smoke-free vehicle if it is ever used FOR WORK by more than one person. That’s not more than one person at a time – it could be two people using it over the course of a year.

The passenger thing’s a good point. The law actually says that a vehicle is smoke free if it is used -

“(a) by members of the public or a section of the public (whether or not for reward or hire); or

(b) in the course of paid or voluntary work by more than one person (even if those persons use the vehicle at different times, or only intermittently).”

I don’t think that (for example) taking your wife to the shops is use ‘by members of the public or a section of the public’. So it looks like you can carry passengers sometimes. There also doesn’t seem to be anything to stop the driver’s wife from smoking in the van – even if he doesn’t smoke.

I could be wrong of course but I’d be very surprised if ‘a section of the public’ could be held to include an owner-driver’s wife.

None of which has anything to do with the original question. No, if you swap vans now and again then they both become ‘smoke free’ and need stickers.

You can order as many as you want free of charge from http://www.smokefreeengland.co.uk/content/order-materials.html

Posted under Employment, Vans

I’ve just noticed that the required no-smoking signs for vehicles and premises can now be ordered free of charge from the Smokefree England website.

Posted under Employment, Legal Issues