Resources: Blog

Airtasker and workers’ rights

Blog
|

Up in the air

Airtasker is the most recent operator in the “gig” economy facing allegations of sham contracting and underpayment for work performed.

Airtasker is the most recent operator in the “gig” economy facing allegations of sham contracting and underpayment for work performed.

Airtasker is an online service where users who require assistance with a particular job can connect with workers who are available and willing to complete the job. The tasks can range from home and garden maintenance, house cleaning, removal and pickup services to more specialist work including computer and IT support, administration and accounting assistance and marketing and development.

Recently, Unions NSW have released a report entitled “Innovation or Exploitation - Busting the Airtasker Myth” claiming that the Airtasker market system allows minimum rates of pay and health and safety protections to be eroded. Unions NSW point to the online task system where users can post the task and the price they are willing to pay for the task to be completed. There is no set minimum rate of pay and workers who want to complete the task can bid against other workers to secure the job.

The Australian national minimum wage is currently $17.70 per hour with casual employees also entitled to 25% casual loading. In our previous blog “Ride with me – Food delivery bicycle riders and sham contracting” we discussed the issue of sham contracting and a proposed test case.

Airtasker keeps 15% of the agreed rate, again undercutting minimum rates of pay payable to the person performing the work. It is this mandatory fee system which Unions NSW have argued suggests that the Airtasker business model operates as a labour hire agency, particularly as Airtasker forms affiliations with other Australian businesses. In July 2016, it was announced that The Good Guys would partner with Airtasker to allow customers to make a purchase as well as organise a worker to install or set up their purchase.

In addition to contraventions of the sham contracting provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) this situation raises the issue of whether affiliated businesses could be held accountable under the accessorial liability provisions under the FW Act. Section 550 of the Act provides that a person ‘involved in’ the contravention of a civil remedy provision of the Act will be taken to have contravened that provision, with potential liability extending to businesses and individuals.

 

Information provided in this blog is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Workplace Law does not accept liability for any loss or damage arising from reliance on the content of this blog, or from links on this website to any external website. Where applicable, liability is limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

 

Similar articles

Workplace Relations Review

Cases and Legislation December 2020

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission amended the Clerks – Private Sector Award 2020 in March 2020 to include temporary measures to facilitate working from home arrangements.

Read more...

Workplace Relations Review

Cases and Legislation September 2020

The Queensland Government recently passed legislation amending the Criminal Code Act 1899 (the Code) to criminalise wage theft by employers in Queensland.‍The Criminal Code and Other Legislation (Wage Theft) Amendment Bill 2020 (the Bill) was introduced to the Queensland Parliament in response to a Report released in 2018 by the Queensland Parliamentary Education, Employment and Small Business Committee following an inquiry into wage theft in Queensland. The Report identified critical issues in wage theft as well as deliberate action taken by employers to frustrate employees’ attempts to recover entitlements.

Read more...

Workplace bullying and reasonable management action

Just Managing

Workplace bullying can be extremely serious and should not be tolerated by employers.

Read more...

Commission orders employer to pay compensation as a result of its procedurally unfair disciplinary process

Procedurally disastrous

When investigating allegations of misconduct against an employee in the workplace, employers must ensure that any ensuing disciplinary process is kept distinct from and separate to from the investigation.

Read more...

The importance of WHS refresher training

Not a “one and done” thing

It is an expected and necessary part of work health and safety (WHS) plans that all new workers receive relevant WHS training.

Read more...

Casual Terms Award Review 2021

NEWS UPDATE

In March 2021, the casual employment amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) introduced a new statutory definition of “casual employee” and an entitlement to casual conversion as one of the National Employment Standards (NES).

Read more...

Let's talk

please contact our directors to discuss how ouR expertise can help your business.

We're here to help

Contact Us
Let Workplace Law become your partner in Workplace Relations.

Signup to receive the latest industry updates with commentary from the Workplace Law team direct to you inbox.