This week, the Insurance Court published two opposite interpretations of the status of Foodora’s couriers, raising questions about their employment status. The issue has been debated for years, with no clear resolution in sight. Essentially, the crux of the matter lies in whether the couriers are independent contractors or employees on the company’s payroll.
In a recent ruling, the Insurance Court presented conflicting opinions regarding the employment status of Foodora’s couriers. On Monday, it was determined that two couriers were not considered employees of the company. However, on Tuesday, another case found that a Foodora courier was indeed considered an employee. The key factor in these decisions was whether the courier personally undertook the work and if the company exerted management and supervision over their activities.
The cases under scrutiny took place in 2020 and 2021, with differing outcomes based on the contract terms at the time. In 2020, the court considered all conditions of an employment contract to be met, while in 2021, this was no longer the case. The changes in the contract offered by Foodora between the two cases played a crucial role in determining the outcome.
Employment law experts, like Seppo Koskinen, believe that the focus should be on whether the work was actually performed personally by the courier. The decisions made by the Insurance Court have significant implications for food delivery companies, as they may alter their contracts to avoid employee status. This shift towards strengthening entrepreneurship may have ramifications for the industry as a whole.
The ruling by the Insurance Court in 2021 cases reaffirmed the courier’s entrepreneurial status, despite some dissenting opinions. The court highlighted the control and supervision exerted by Foodora over the couriers’ work, prompting debates over the true nature of their employment relationship. Moving forward, the issue of employment status for food couriers remains a complex and evolving legal challenge.