- There is an axiom enunciating how we must change in commensurate with the dynamically evolving situations/circumstances around us. If not, the whole world will move ahead leaving us behind. Of course, humanity also must be open to embracing newer ideas that would be beneficial. The technology-driven initiatives are dime a dozen helping the global community lead lives with aplomb based on perpetually evolving user-friendly comforts. Innovative service-oriented endeavours are defining our present-day world making life extremely comfortable. One such service-oriented initiative is the app-based cab mobility aggregators that have sprouted around the world in great numbers. Who doesn’t know Uber, Ola, Rapido, and the ilk?
PC: DARIUS MIRSHAHZADEH
- Most Indian cities boast international aggregators who are competing with the local entities for the transportation pie. With the public transport system not up to the mark in several metros, Indian commuters are embracing aggregator-offered services in larger numbers. The moot point to ponder over here is whether the services offered are at par with the expectations and desired levels. The answer is no. Are the aggregators shouldering enough responsibilities and accountable for the laxity in services? Again, the answer is no. In a welcome move related to one such instance, a Thane district consumer commission order directing Uber to pay Rs 20,000 to a lawyer who missed a flight to Chennai sets a worthy precedent. Let’s delve further into the same.
- The lawyer had submitted that various delays were caused by the cab driver placing the onus squarely on aggregators to ensure the proper delivery of service. Uber shirked responsibility for the driver’s failures, claiming it merely facilitates a connection between driver and rider. And that the driver was not an employee but an independent contractor and therefore solely responsible for any incident. How convenient the argument appears obfuscating its responsibilities. Welcomingly, by calling the bluff of the aggregator, the commission ruled that Uber arranged and scheduled the ride through third-party providers and that the rider paid the fare as charged by Uber to the app, and not to the driver.
PC: Alex Scroxton
- Since Uber is running a ride-hailing business, it’s the company’s responsibility to ensure that drivers adhere to high professional standards, pass background checks, and are skilled enough to follow route instructions without making mistakes. Yes, Uber’s claim that drivers are independent contractors was turned down by the UK Supreme Court while upholding an employment tribunal ruling that held they were workers, although not employees. A broader point is that social media companies can’t get away by claiming they are merely platforms and therefore not responsible for any content they host. With this precedent-setting ruling, consumers henceforth should get relief protecting their rights without allowing aggregators from fleecing them.
