Babak Belurs

Jumat, 19 Februari 2021

Harry and Meghan: Twinning a commercial lifestyle with the privileges of public service crossed the palace's line - Sky News

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are stepping away from the working Royal Family for good.

It may be sad for his father's family, particularly the Queen, but it is good news for the plans that Prince Harry and Meghan are independently pursuing.

There is no rule that expects close relations of the reigning sovereign to dedicate their lives to supporting the monarch's work - but those that do benefit from special privileges in order to support this work.

These advantages include things like not queuing at airports, motorcades to get to events on time and a staff that is broadly supported with public funds.

Following their wedding at Windsor Castle in May 2018, this was the course most people thought Harry and Meghan would follow. However, they have chosen a different path.

With enterprising zeal, they have secured a career together in the United States that draws on their own characters and talents, which looks like it will bring wealth - more than sufficient for their growing family.

But twinning this commercial lifestyle with the privileges granted by the UK for public service crossed the palace's line.

Free of this public duty, they still retain titles (he is Duke of Sussex, Earl of Dumbarton and Baron Kilkeel) intended for their public service to the Crown.

Also, Harry and son Archie remain sixth and seventh in the line of succession to the Crown, according to statute, and Harry is one of four counsellors of state stood by to enable government business in the event the Queen is away or unwell.

These matters may need to be addressed in slow time, however for now Harry and Meghan remain much-loved members of the Queen's family but out of the working Royal Family.

All patronages and formal appointments in the armed forces are dissolved and they are free to shape their chosen lives.

It is a significant moment for Harry and Meghan but, after a thousand years of navigation through the vicissitudes of history, it is not so significant for the Crown.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMioQFodHRwczovL25ld3Muc2t5LmNvbS9zdG9yeS9oYXJyeS1hbmQtbWVnaGFuLXBlcm1hbmVudGx5LXN0ZXAtZG93bi1hcy13b3JraW5nLXJveWFscy1hLXNpZ25pZmljYW50LW1vbWVudC1mb3ItY291cGxlLWJ1dC1ub3Qtc28tc2lnbmlmaWNhbnQtZm9yLXRoZS1jcm93bi0xMjIyMzAyN9IBpQFodHRwczovL25ld3Muc2t5LmNvbS9zdG9yeS9hbXAvaGFycnktYW5kLW1lZ2hhbi1wZXJtYW5lbnRseS1zdGVwLWRvd24tYXMtd29ya2luZy1yb3lhbHMtYS1zaWduaWZpY2FudC1tb21lbnQtZm9yLWNvdXBsZS1idXQtbm90LXNvLXNpZ25pZmljYW50LWZvci10aGUtY3Jvd24tMTIyMjMwMjc?oc=5

2021-02-19 18:33:45Z
52781381362107

Harry and Meghan permanently step down as working royals: A significant moment for couple but not so significant for the Crown - Sky News

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are stepping away from the working Royal Family for good.

It may be sad for his father's family, particularly the Queen, but it is good news for the plans that Prince Harry and Meghan are independently pursuing.

There is no rule that expects close relations of the reigning sovereign to dedicate their lives to supporting the monarch's work - but those that do benefit from special privileges in order to support this work.

These advantages include things like not queuing at airports, motorcades to get to events on time and a staff that is broadly supported with public funds.

Following their wedding at Windsor Castle in May 2018, this was the course most people thought Harry and Meghan would follow. However, they have chosen a different path.

With enterprising zeal, they have secured a career together in the United States that draws on their own characters and talents, which looks like it will bring wealth - more than sufficient for their growing family.

But twinning this commercial lifestyle with the privileges granted by the UK for public service crossed the palace's line.

Free of this public duty, they still retain titles (he is Duke of Sussex, Earl of Dumbarton and Baron Kilkeel) intended for their public service to the Crown.

Also, Harry and son Archie remain sixth and seventh in the line of succession to the Crown, according to statute, and Harry is one of four counsellors of state stood by to enable government business in the event the Queen is away or unwell.

These matters may need to be addressed in slow time, however for now Harry and Meghan remain much-loved members of the Queen's family but out of the working Royal Family.

All patronages and formal appointments in the armed forces are dissolved and they are free to shape their chosen lives.

It is a significant moment for Harry and Meghan but, after a thousand years of navigation through the vicissitudes of history, it is not so significant for the Crown.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMioQFodHRwczovL25ld3Muc2t5LmNvbS9zdG9yeS9oYXJyeS1hbmQtbWVnaGFuLXBlcm1hbmVudGx5LXN0ZXAtZG93bi1hcy13b3JraW5nLXJveWFscy1hLXNpZ25pZmljYW50LW1vbWVudC1mb3ItY291cGxlLWJ1dC1ub3Qtc28tc2lnbmlmaWNhbnQtZm9yLXRoZS1jcm93bi0xMjIyMzAyN9IBpQFodHRwczovL25ld3Muc2t5LmNvbS9zdG9yeS9hbXAvaGFycnktYW5kLW1lZ2hhbi1wZXJtYW5lbnRseS1zdGVwLWRvd24tYXMtd29ya2luZy1yb3lhbHMtYS1zaWduaWZpY2FudC1tb21lbnQtZm9yLWNvdXBsZS1idXQtbm90LXNvLXNpZ25pZmljYW50LWZvci10aGUtY3Jvd24tMTIyMjMwMjc?oc=5

2021-02-19 17:49:39Z
52781381362107

Uber drivers are workers not self-employed, Supreme Court rules - BBC News

Former Uber drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam pose in front of the Supreme Court on Friday

Uber drivers must be treated as workers rather than self-employed, the UK's Supreme Court has ruled.

The decision could mean thousands of Uber drivers are set to be entitled to minimum wage and holiday pay.

The ruling could leave the ride-hailing app facing a hefty compensation bill, and have wider consequences for the gig economy.

Uber said the ruling centred on a small number of drivers and it had since made changes to its business.

In a long-running legal battle, Uber had appealed to the Supreme Court after losing three earlier rounds.

Uber's share price fell 1% on Wall Street's open as investors grappled with what impact the London ruling could have on the firm's business model.

It is being challenged by its drivers in multiple countries over whether they should be classed as workers or self-employed.

In the US, California voters passed a measure called Proposition 22 that will see freelance workers continue to be classified as independent contractors in November, overturning a landmark labour law passed in 2019.

'Massive achievement'

Former Uber drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam, who originally won an employment tribunal against the ride hailing app giant in October 2016, told the BBC they were "thrilled and relieved" by the ruling.

"I think it's a massive achievement in a way that we were able to stand up against a giant," said Mr Aslam, president of the App Drivers & Couriers Union (ADCU).

"We didn't give up and we were consistent - no matter what we went through emotionally or physically or financially, we stood our ground."

Lord Leggatt said that the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Uber's appeal

Uber appealed against the employment tribunal decision but the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the ruling in November 2017.

The company then took the case to the Court of Appeal, which upheld the ruling in December 2018.

The ruling on Friday was Uber's last appeal, as the Supreme Court is Britain's highest court, and it has the final say on legal matters.

Delivering his judgement, Lord Leggatt said that the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Uber's appeal that it was an intermediary party and stated that drivers should be considered to be working not only when driving a passenger, but whenever logged in to the app.

The court considered several elements in its judgement:

Uber set the fare which meant that they dictated how much drivers could earn
Uber set the contract terms and drivers had no say in them
Request for rides is constrained by Uber who can penalise drivers if they reject too many rides
Uber monitors a driver's service through the star rating and has the capacity to terminate the relationship if after repeated warnings this does not improve

Looking at these and other factors, the court determined that drivers were in a position of subordination to Uber where the only way they could increase their earnings would be to work longer hours.

Jamie Heywood, Uber's Regional General Manager for Northern and Eastern Europe, said: "We respect the Court's decision which focussed on a small number of drivers who used the Uber app in 2016.

"Since then we have made some significant changes to our business, guided by drivers every step of the way. These include giving even more control over how they earn and providing new protections like free insurance in case of sickness or injury.

"We are committed to doing more and will now consult with every active driver across the UK to understand the changes they want to see."

What did Uber argue?

Uber has long argued that it is a booking agent, which hires self-employed contractors that provide transport.

By not being classified as a transport provider, Uber is not currently paying 20% VAT on fares.

Uber app on phone

The Supreme Court ruled that Uber has to consider its drivers "workers" from the time they log on to the app, until they log off.

This is a key point because Uber drivers typically spend time waiting for people to book rides on the app.

Previously, the firm had said that if drivers were found to be workers, then it would only count the time during journeys when a passenger is in the car.

"This is a win-win-win for drivers, passengers and cities. It means Uber now has the correct economic incentives not to oversupply the market with too many vehicles and too many drivers," said James Farrar, ADCU's general secretary.

"The upshot of that oversupply has been poverty, pollution and congestion."

Why are some drivers unhappy with Uber?

Mr Aslam, who claims Uber's practices forced him to leave the trade as he couldn't make ends meet, is considering becoming a driver for the app again. But he is upset that the ruling took so long.

"It took us six years to establish what we should have got in 2015. Someone somewhere, in the government or the regulator, massively let down these workers, many of whom are in a precarious position," he said.

Mr Farrar points out that with fares down 80% due to the pandemic, many drivers have been struggling financially and feel trapped in Uber's system.

"We're seeing many of our members earning £30 gross a day right now," he said, explaining that the self-employment grants issued by the government only cover 80% of a driver's profits, which isn't even enough to pay for their costs.

"If we had these rights today, those drivers could at least earn a minimum wage to live on."

Will we pay more for Uber rides?

That remains to be seen, but it could potentially happen.

When Uber listed its shares in the United States in 2019, its filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) included a section on risks to its business.

The company said in this section that if it had to classify drivers as workers, it would "incur significant additional expenses" in compensating the drivers for things such as the minimum wage and overtime.

"Further, any such reclassification would require us to fundamentally change our business model, and consequently have an adverse effect on our business and financial condition," it added.

What is the VAT issue about?

Uber also wrote in the filing that if Mr Farrar and Mr Aslam were to win their case, HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) would then classify the firm as a transport provider, and Uber would need to pay VAT on fares.

This relates to a judicial review filed by Jolyon Maugham QC in 2019.

Mr Maugham, a barrister specialising in tax and employment law, applied to HMRC to ask for a judicial review and that HMRC demand that Uber pay VAT.

"I tried to force the issue by suing Uber for a VAT receipt, because I thought that, that way, even if HMRC didn't want to charge Uber, I would be able to force it to," he told the BBC.

"The Supreme Court has fundamentally answered two questions at the same time: one is whether drivers are workers for Uber, and the other is whether Uber is liable to pay VAT to HMRC," he said.

"It makes it extremely difficult for Uber to continue to resist paying what I understand to be more than £1bn in VAT and interest."

HMRC and Uber are still in dispute about the firm's VAT liability.

What does this mean for the gig economy?

Rachel Mathieson, senior associate at Bates Wells, which represented Mr Farrar and Mr Aslam, said her firm's position was that the ruling applies to all 90,000 drivers who have been active with Uber since and including 2016.

"Our position is that the ruling applies to all of their drivers at large," she said.

"However, we don't think it stops there. The judgement today underscores some very important principles in respect to workers."

Dr Alex Wood, an Internet Institute research associate on the gig economy at the University of Oxford, disagrees.

He told the BBC that because the UK doesn't have a labour inspectorate, these "rules aren't enforced and it falls to workers to bring subsequent tribunals".

This means that "in reality, it's very easy for Uber to just ignore this until more tribunals come for the remaining 40,000 [drivers]".

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiKmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy9idXNpbmVzcy01NjEyMzY2ONIBLmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy9hbXAvYnVzaW5lc3MtNTYxMjM2Njg?oc=5

2021-02-19 15:19:44Z
52781387087578

Harry and Meghan not returning as working members of Royal Family - BBC News

Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex depart Canada House on January 07, 2020 in London, England

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will not return as working members of the Royal Family, Buckingham Palace has said.

The Queen confirmed the couple would not "continue with the responsibilities and duties that come with a life of public service".

A statement said the Royal Family were "saddened by their decision", which was first announced last January.

The couple said "service is universal" and offered to continue supporting the organisations they have represented.

The duke and duchess said last year they would step back as "senior" royals and work to become financially independent.

They formally stepped down in March, with a plan to review the arrangements after 12 months.

The confirmation of their departure follows conversations between Harry and members of the Royal Family.

"The Queen has written confirming that in stepping away from the work of the Royal Family it is not possible to continue with the responsibilities and duties that come with a life of public service," a statement from Buckingham Palace said.

"While all are saddened by their decision, the Duke and Duchess remain much loved members of the family."

A spokesman for Harry and Meghan said: "As evidenced by their work over the past year, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain committed to their duty and service to the UK and around the world, and have offered their continued support to the organisations they have represented regardless of official role."

They added: "We can all live a life of service. Service is universal."

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiJmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL3VrLTU2MTI3Njcz0gEqaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmJjLmNvLnVrL25ld3MvYW1wL3VrLTU2MTI3Njcz?oc=5

2021-02-19 12:51:00Z
52781381362107

Uber drivers are workers not self-employed, Supreme Court rules - BBC News

Former Uber drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam

Uber drivers must be treated as workers rather than self-employed, the UK's Supreme Court has ruled.

The decision means tens of thousands of Uber drivers are set to be entitled to minimum wage and holiday pay.

The ruling could leave the ride-hailing app facing a hefty compensation bill, and have wider consequences for the gig economy.

In a long-running legal battle, Uber had appealed to the Supreme Court after losing three earlier rounds.

'Massive achievement'

Former Uber drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam, who originally won an employment tribunal against the ride hailing app giant in October 2016, told the BBC they were "thrilled and relieved" by the ruling.

"I think it's a massive achievement in a way that we were able to stand up against a giant," said Mr Aslam, president of the App Drivers & Couriers Union (ADCU).

"We didn't give up and we were consistent - no matter what we went through emotionally or physically or financially, we stood our ground."

Lord Leggatt said that the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Uber's appeal

Uber appealed against the employment tribunal decision but the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the ruling in November 2017.

The company then took the case to the High Court, which upheld the ruling again in December 2018.

The ruling on Friday was Uber's last appeal, as the Supreme Court is Britain's highest court, and it has the final say on legal matters.

Delivering his judgement, Lord Leggatt said that the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Uber's appeal that it was an intermediary party and stated that drivers should be considered to be working not only when driving a passenger, but whenever logged in to the app.

The court considered several elements in its judgement:

Uber set the fare which meant that they dictated how much drivers could earn
Uber set the contract terms and drivers had no say in them
Request for rides is constrained by Uber who can penalise drivers if they reject too many rides
Uber monitors a driver's service through the star rating and has the capacity to terminate the relationship if after repeated warnings this does not improve

Looking at these and other factors, the court determined that drivers were in a position of subordination to Uber where the only way they could increase their earnings would be to work longer hours.

Jamie Heywood, Uber's Regional General Manager for Northern and Eastern Europe, said: "We respect the Court's decision which focussed on a small number of drivers who used the Uber app in 2016.

"Since then we have made some significant changes to our business, guided by drivers every step of the way. These include giving even more control over how they earn and providing new protections like free insurance in case of sickness or injury.

"We are committed to doing more and will now consult with every active driver across the UK to understand the changes they want to see."

'Drivers are struggling'

The Supreme Court's ruling that Uber has to consider its drivers "workers" from the time they log on to the app, until they log off is seen as a key point.

Uber drivers typically spend time waiting for people to book rides on the app. Previously, the firm had said that if drivers were found to be workers, then it would only count the time during journeys when a passenger is in the car.

"This is a win-win-win for drivers, passengers and cities. It means Uber now has the correct economic incentives not to oversupply the market with too many vehicles and too many drivers," said James Farrar, ADCU's general secretary.

"The upshot of that oversupply has been poverty, pollution and congestion."

Uber app on phone

However, questions still remain about how the new classification will work, and how it affects gig economy workers who work not only for Uber, but also for other competing apps.

Mr Aslam, who claims Uber's practices forced him to leave the trade as he couldn't make ends meet, is considering becoming a driver for the app again. But he is upset that it took so long.

"It took us six years to establish what we should have got in 2015. Someone somewhere, in the government or the regulator, massively let down these workers, many of whom are in a precarious position," he said.

Mr Farrar points out that with fares down 80% due to the pandemic, many drivers have been struggling financially and feel trapped in Uber's system.

"We're seeing many of our members earning £30 gross a day right now," he said, explaining that the self-employment grants issued by the government only cover 80% of a driver's profits, which isn't even enough to pay for their costs.

"If we had these rights today, those drivers could at least earn a minimum wage to live on."

Impact on Uber

When Uber listed its shares in the US in 2019, its filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) included a section on risks to its business.

The company said in this section that if it had to classify drivers as workers, it would "incur significant additional expenses" in compensating the drivers for things such as the minimum wage and overtime.

"Further, any such reclassification would require us to fundamentally change our business model, and consequently have an adverse effect on our business and financial condition," it added.

Uber also wrote in the filing that if Mr Farrar and Mr Aslam were to win their case, HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) would then classify the firm as a transport provider, and Uber would need to pay VAT on fares.

The company has long argued that it is a booking agent, which hires self-employed contractors that provide transport.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiLGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL2J1c2luZXNzLTU2MTIzNjY40gEwaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmJjLmNvLnVrL25ld3MvYW1wL2J1c2luZXNzLTU2MTIzNjY4?oc=5

2021-02-19 11:30:54Z
52781387087578

UK Supreme Court rules Uber drivers are workers - BBC News

Former Uber drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam

Ride hailing taxi app firm Uber must classify its drivers as workers rather than self-employed, the UK's Supreme Court has ruled.

The decision means tens of thousands of Uber drivers are set to be entitled to minimum wage and holiday pay.

The ruling could leave Uber facing a hefty compensation bill, and have wider consequences for the gig economy.

In a long-running legal battle, Uber had appealed to the Supreme Court after losing three earlier rounds.

'Massive achievement'

Former Uber drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam, who originally won an employment tribunal against the ride hailing app giant in October 2016, told the BBC they were "thrilled and relieved" by the ruling.

"I think it's a massive achievement in a way that we were able to stand up against a giant," said Mr Aslam, president of the App Drivers & Couriers Union (ADCU).

"We didn't give up and we were consistent - no matter what we went through emotionally or physically or financially, we stood our ground."

Uber appealed against the employment tribunal decision but the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the ruling in November 2017.

The ride hailing taxi app firm then took the case to the High Court, which upheld the ruling again in December 2018.

The ruling on Friday was Uber's last appeal, as the Supreme Court is Britain's highest court, and it has the final say on legal matters.

'Drivers are struggling'

A key point in the Supreme Court's ruling is that Uber has to consider its drivers "workers" from the time they log on to the app, until they log off.

Uber drivers typically spend time waiting for people to book rides on the app. Previously, the firm had said that if drivers were found to be workers, then it would only count the time during journeys when a passenger is in the car.

"This is a win-win-win for drivers, passengers and cities. It means Uber now has the correct economic incentives not to oversupply the market with too many vehicles and too many drivers," said James Farrar, ADCU's general secretary.

"The upshot of that oversupply has been poverty, pollution and congestion."

However, questions still remain about how the new classification will work, and how it affects gig economy workers who work not only for Uber, but also for other competing apps.

Mr Aslam, who claims Uber's practices forced him to leave the trade as he couldn't make ends meet, is considering becoming a driver for the app again. But he is upset that it took so long.

"It took us six years to establish what we should have got in 2015. Someone somewhere, in the government or the regulator, massively let down these workers, many of whom are in a precarious position," he said.

Mr Farrar points out that with fares down 80% due to the pandemic, many drivers have been struggling financially and feel trapped in Uber's system.

"We're seeing many of our members earning £30 gross a day right now," he said, explaining that the self-employment grants issued by the government only cover 80% of a driver's profits, which isn't even enough to pay for their costs.

"If we had these rights today, those drivers could at least earn a minimum wage to live on."

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiLGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL2J1c2luZXNzLTU2MTIzNjY40gEwaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmJjLmNvLnVrL25ld3MvYW1wL2J1c2luZXNzLTU2MTIzNjY4?oc=5

2021-02-19 10:10:50Z
52781387087578

Scotland's papers: 'Lockalikes' and supply teachers face 'job crisis' - BBC News

Scottish Sun

herald

The Scotsman

Scottish Daily Mail

The Times

telegraph

Scottish Daily Express

Daily Record

national

metro

courier

Edinburgh Evening News

Glasgow Times

telegraph

Press & Journal

Related Internet Links

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiL2h0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL3VrLXNjb3RsYW5kLTU2MTIwNjQy0gEzaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmJjLmNvLnVrL25ld3MvYW1wL3VrLXNjb3RsYW5kLTU2MTIwNjQy?oc=5

2021-02-19 08:32:00Z
52781382676001

Langganan: Postingan (Atom)