Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
22 June 2021 | Story André Damons
Gig economy and Uber
Left: Associate Prof Denine Smit is a lecturer in the Department of Mercantile Law, Faculty of Law, University of the Free State (UFS) where she currently lectures several modules with her focus on Labour Law. Right: Mr Grey Stopforth is a lecturer in the UFS Department of Mercantile Law, Faculty of Law.

Opinion article by Associate Prof Denine Smit and Mr Grey Stopforth, Lecturer, Department of Mercantile Law, Faculty of Law, University of the Free State 

Introduction
The modern world of work is changing rapidly – to such an extent that by 2030, 65% of primary school learners will take up positions currently unknown to man. ‘Gig work’ is an umbrella term comprising three distinct types of services: capital platform work, crowd work, and app work. (Duggan et al. 2019:117) ‘Gig work’, within the labour context, is regarded as an umbrella term comprising two distinct types of work: crowd work, and app work. Each of the previously mentioned types of gig work performs a particular service in the gig economy. To illustrate, crowd work refers to work that ranges in skills level and difficulty, which is outsourced to a large pool of online workers, for example, tasks available on Freelancer and Fiverr. In contrast, app work (also known as on-demand work) involves an application (app) that connects clients and workers via the online platform to perform tasks, also referred to as ‘gigs’, in a specific geographical area. This type of gig work consists of various types of tasks, such as ride-sharing services (e.g., Uber and Bolt), cleaning services (e.g., SweepSouth), and the running of errands (e.g., TaskRabbit and Errandworld). Uber currently serves more than 10 000 cities worldwide.  

The previous three industrial revolutions were prompted by disruptions that occurred through the harnessing of steam. The discovery of telecommunications and computers and technological advancements led to the internet of things, a typical characteristic of 4IR. It is in 4IR where the new techno-economic paradigm needs to be addressed. This is where robotic devices could replace humans. We now face two sides of the coin: working in a digitised environment where workers are not protected by traditional labour laws, such as Uber drivers, or seeking formal employment where there are not enough standard jobs.  

The changing landscape
The modern industrial workplace is already characterised by the introduction of several robotic devices that could easily replace human capital in the future. Examples hereof are rife:  Libby is a robot at the University of Pretoria that assists students. A social humanoid robot called Sophia, created with her ‘own’ passport, was interviewed on her own at the UN, and is regarded as our first digital citizen. We also have Deep Blue, an IBM computer that defeated the world's best chess player, and Watson, another IBM computer that beat the Jeopardy! champions, as well as robots that can now play the piano, grade high school tests, paint, compose music, and write newspaper articles. (Doci & Virgillito 2019: 602). A job for life and a physical workplace may both disappear in future and be replaced by gigs for payment, flexibility, and continuous learning. The COVID-19 pandemic fast-tracked 4IR, and this is becoming worrisome in South Africa, where we reached formal unemployment figures of 32,6% (7,2 million) and 42,6% (11,4 million) if discouraged work seekers are added to the mix. More critical, South Africa's youth unemployment rate is at a staggering all-time high of 74,7% (STATS SA, 5 April 2021). We need to look at new opportunities in the gig economy, like Uber, to earn a living and alleviate poverty.

Uber and work
Uber is merely an example of ‘work’ on the platform, but many gig workers are not protected by law. If we focus on the new categories of workers, such as those working for Uber, the legal landscape is exciting and problematic. However, problems have led to sporadic strike actions in several African countries such as Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa.

In January 2021, Uber Eats drivers in South Africa laid down their 'tools' by deactivating their apps as part of a nationwide strike action in response to a decision taken by Uber Eats South Africa to lower the fee paid to drivers per delivery.  Later in March 2021, Uber and Bolt drivers from South Africa engaged in strike action, demanding that e-hailing companies adopt a fair pricing strategy, and that their own and their passengers' safety be prioritised. Other African countries followed suit shortly thereafter. In the past year, many app workers have brought court claims in different countries in the hopes of obtaining full employee status. Let’s see what happens in other countries.

United Kindom (UK)
On 19 February 2021, the Supreme Court in the UK ruled in Uber BV v Aslam (2021) UKSC 5 that Uber drivers are ‘workers’ rather than self-employed independent contractors. The court outlined several key factors to justify its decision, most of which relate to the degree of control that Uber has over its drivers. Based on this, the court found that drivers were, in reality, ‘workers’ and not independent contractors, which implies that they are legally protected.

Australia
A recent decision by Australia’s Fair Commission (FWC) in Diego Franco v Deliveroo Australia Pty Ltd (2021) FWC 2818, could impact Uber’s operation in the country in the future. On 18 May 2021, the commission ruled that a former Dilveroo driver was an employee of Deliveroo rather than an independent contractor. The FWC emphasised the importance of standing back from the detailed picture and looking at the overall effect of the relationship. Similar to the UK ruling, the FWC also noted that Deliveroo was able to implement or withdraw a significant level of control over Mr Franco, which was a decisive factor indicating the existence of an employment relationship. Having considered the facts, the FWC found the driver to be an employee of Deliveroo, and he was therefore entitled to unfair dismissal protection. Whether this decision will stand in the future remains to be seen, as Deliveroo has indicated that it will appeal the FWC's decision.

United States of America (USA)
Similar to many other countries, the USA also has several cases with mixed judgements. For the purpose of this opinion piece, we will single out Proposal 22 (Prop 22), which was passed in California at the end of 2020. The Prop provides drivers with a guaranteed minimum earning for the time worked while actively providing rides, compensation for some vehicle expenses, occupational accident insurance to cover injuries and illnesses on the job, and ‘funding for new health benefits’ that apply to drivers with prescribed minimum hours per week.

Spain
A new royal decree regulating delivery app workers, also known as the ‘rider law’, was ratified by Spain's cabinet in March 2021. The new ‘rider law’ introduces additional provisions for a new presumption regarding the existence of an employment relationship in the context of the delivery and distribution of products through digital delivery platforms. The decree also makes it mandatory for gig businesses to inform the app workers’ legal representatives of the parameters, rules, and instructions on which the algorithms or artificial intelligence (AI) systems are based, which affect decision-making that may influence working conditions, access to, and maintenance of employment, including profiling. The law comes into effect 90 days following its publication in the Spanish Official Gazette. The gig businesses, therefore, have until mid-August to comply.

The way forward for South Africa
It is currently uncertain whether South Africa’s Uber drivers will be classified as employees or independent contractors. See Uber South Africa Technology Services (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Public Service and Allied Workers (NUPSAW) and Others (2018) 39 ILJ 903 (LC), in which the Labour Court held that the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration’s ruling failed to consider the fact that Uber SA and Uber B.V. are two separate entities. The question as to whether Uber drivers are employees of Uber was subsequently left unanswered. Each country has a unique and intricate statutory framework that regulates the traditional work relationship, making a universal approach to classifying on-demand workers almost impossible. However, it would be in our best interest to be mindful of these developments to pursue a workable solution that fits our South African context.

Thus, the jury is still out on whether gig work is good, bad or a little of both.

News Archive

Verslag: SA studente atletiek (Afrikaans)
2005-04-28

Absa-kovsieatletiek
SA studente atletiekkampioenskap - 22 en 23 April 2005 Johannesburg Universiteit

 

Weereens baie goed!!! Dit is hoe ons die Kovsieatlete se vertonings op en af van die baan af kan beskryf. Die 22 medaljes vanjaar teenoor die 25 van 2004, die 14 van 2003 en die 10 van 2002 spreek boekdele, veral as ons in ag neem dat ons in die laaste week 4 van ons top atlete weens beserings verloor het (Antonie Rossouw, Nico Oosthuizen, Jaco Claasen en Renè Kalmer).

Ons het op 20 April om 09:00 vanaf Pelliespark per bus na Johannesburg vertrek en tuisgegaan in die Randburg Road Lodge hotel.

'n Totaal van 43 atlete – 18 vroue en 25 mans het die Kovsies verteenwoordig (spanlys aangeheg).

Die bestuurspan het bestaan uit Danie Cronjé bestuurder mans, Sarina Cronjé bestuurder vroue, Bertus Pretorius afrigter mans, Ans Botha afrigter vroue, Hendrik Cronjé (Video), Jan du Toit, Sidney van Biljon, DB Prinsloo sportbestuurder.

Die mediese span het bestaan uit Dr. Org Strauss en Daleen Lamprecht(bio).

Die volgende lede van die ABSA KOVSIESPAN het medaljes verwerf.

GOUD    
     
Jan vd Merwe  400   46,37
     
Johan Cronjé    1500 mans   3:50.20
     
Boy Soke  10000   30:23,40
     
Charlene Henning   Driesprong vroue  12.62m
     
Francois Potgieter      Tienkamp  6862 punte
     
Magdel Venter    Diskusgooi vroue     46.94m
     
Kovsiespan mans   4x400 Aflos  3:10,17
     
(Dirk Roets, Francois Lötter, Johan Cronjé, Jan van der Merwe)
     
     
SILWER    
     
Charlene Henning  Verspring vroue    6,16m
     
Magdel Venter  Gewigstoot vroue  13,21m
     
Sanè du Preez   Hamergooi vroue     44,71m
     
Boy Soke     5000m    14:36,60
     
Francois Potgieter  110 Hekkies mans    14,00sek
     
Christine Kalmer  1500m vroue    4:35,40
     
Cobus Marais    3000m hindernis   9:32,80
     
     
BRONS    
     
Gustav Kukkuk     110 Hekkies mans    14.00sek
     
Mariana Banting    Driesprong vroue  12.36m
     
Helen-Joan Lombaard   Sewekamp vroue    3354 punte
     
Clive Wessels   Paalspring   4,05m
     
Johan Cronjé  800m  1:52,01
     
Kovsiespan vroue   4x100 Aflos    47,56
     
(Denise Polson, Elmie Hugo, Carlene Henning, Minette Albertse)
     
Kovsiespan mans    4x100 Aflos   42,21
     
( Tiaan Pretorius, Gustav Kukkuk, Marno Meyer, Wiaan Kriel)
     
     
Kovsies wat ook onder die eerste 8 geëindig het sien as volg daaruit:
     
     
4de Plek    
     
Mariana Banting   Hoogspring vroue  1.70m
     
Stefan van Heerden   Driesprong  15,12m
     
Elmie Hugo   200m   24,12sek
     
Ronè Reynecke     400m  57,31sek
     
     
5de Plek    
     
Jackie Kriel    100 Hekkies    13,90sek
     
Jackie Kriel     400 Hekkies   65,40sek
     
Riana Rossouw    Gewigstoot    10,59m   
     
Kenny Jooste   Verspring   7,23m
     
Elmie Hugo    100m  11,86sek
     
Helen-Joan Lombard  Paalspring    3,25m
     
Ronè Reynecke     800m   2:17,58
     
Christine Kalmer   5000m      17:38,32
     
     
6de Plek    
     
Tiaan Pretorius  Verspring   7,21m
     
Francois Pretorius    800m     1:52,67
     
Riana Rossouw   Spiesgooi      38,12m
     
Kovsiespan vroue   4x400 Aflos  4:06,56
     
(Ronè Reynecke, Denise Polson, Lise du Toit, Elmie Hugo)
     
     
7de Plek    
     
Gerda Rust    Hamergooi   36,37m
     
Schalk Roestoff     1500m      3:55,80
     
Francois Lotter    400m       47,94
     
Pienaar j v Rensburg    10000m   32:12,21
     
Kovsie mans  ”A”  en  B span  4x400     3:15,44
     
     
8ste Plek    
     
Charles le Roux   Verspring   7,06m
     
Tiaan Pretorius  Driesprong  14,06m

In die spankompetisie het die Vroue 4de geëindig en die mans 4de. In die algehele kompetisie het die Kovsies ook die 4de plek behaal (aangeheg).

Die gees en gedrag van die toergroep was uitstekend en was die atlete goeie ambassadeurs vir die Kovsies.

Danie Cronjé     Sarina Cronjé
Spanbestuurder  Mans   Spanbestuurder Vroue

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept