dailymail.co.uk/news/article … acked.html
Basicly, he worked for a third party delivering Amazon parcels. He got mugged, his van stolen (including personal belongings) and 60 odd parcels. Now, his company want to bill him for the damage to the van AND the cost of the parcels. Forgot to say, they told him not to come back too.
Still think van driving is worth a go?
The company will find themselves on the wrong side of a tribunal claim if they try that on. They have GIT insurance so they should claim on it.
Captain Caveman 76:
Amazon delivery driver who was robbed on duty is sacked | Daily Mail OnlineBasicly, he worked for a third party delivering Amazon parcels. He got mugged, his van stolen (including personal belongings) and 60 odd parcels. Now, his company want to bill him for the damage to the van AND the cost of the parcels. Forgot to say, they told him not to come back too.
Still think van driving is worth a go?
Was he self employed? I expect he would be billed if so…
Apparently the company aren’t expecting him to pay for the parcels, but say it’s in their employment contract that the final weeks pay is held back, until they vans have been checked over for damage and the money is then paid after damages have been paid for.
Last paragraph.
An Amazon spokesmen said “Our delivery providers are expected to ensure drivers receive a minimum of £12ph before deductions excluding bonuses, incentives and fuel reimbursements”
I wonder how often Amazon check their van operators are paying the correct money?
£12.00 an hour, yeah, right.
Yes that’s misleading, down the bottom of the article, they say they aren’t billing him for the parcels.
I am wondering if he did leave the keys in the ignition, that would invalidate the insurance, and if he did, then frankly no reason he shouldn’t get sacked.
Something about “being forced to the floor”?
Hand over the keys or risk whatever. …
And that £12 oer hour doesn’t include bonuses and fuel incentives!
The company is referred to variously as an agency and a transport provider. Referring to “wages” implies an employee?
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
It may be £12 ph but being self employed surely theres fuel to deduct from this? Couple this with the additional vehicle running cost its got to work out a pittance…
Conor:
The company will find themselves on the wrong side of a tribunal claim if they try that on. They have GIT insurance so they should claim on it.
How does that work at tribunal, if you’re self-employed though? 
AndrewG:
It may be £12 ph but being self employed surely theres fuel to deduct from this? Couple this with the additional vehicle running cost its got to work out a pittance…
The Amazon statement had nothing to do with the drivers being self employed, it said their delivery providers are expected to ensure drivers receive a minimum of £12ph.
Would suggest employee of a delivery company.
Winseer:
Conor:
The company will find themselves on the wrong side of a tribunal claim if they try that on. They have GIT insurance so they should claim on it.How does that work at tribunal, if you’re self-employed though?
Nothing in the article suggests the driver is self employed, in fact seems to suggest he was an employee, so what has that got to do with this.
muckles:
AndrewG:
It may be £12 ph but being self employed surely theres fuel to deduct from this? Couple this with the additional vehicle running cost its got to work out a pittance…The Amazon statement had nothing to do with the drivers being self employed, it said their delivery providers are expected to ensure drivers receive a minimum of £12ph.
Would suggest employee of a delivery company.Winseer:
Conor:
The company will find themselves on the wrong side of a tribunal claim if they try that on. They have GIT insurance so they should claim on it.How does that work at tribunal, if you’re self-employed though?
Nothing in the article suggests the driver is self employed, in fact seems to suggest he was an employee, so what has that got to do with this.
I think youll find theyre self employed working on Amazons ‘Flex’ system…
AndrewG:
muckles:
AndrewG:
It may be £12 ph but being self employed surely theres fuel to deduct from this? Couple this with the additional vehicle running cost its got to work out a pittance…The Amazon statement had nothing to do with the drivers being self employed, it said their delivery providers are expected to ensure drivers receive a minimum of £12ph.
Would suggest employee of a delivery company.I think youll find theyre self employed working on Amazons ‘Flex’ system…
The Amazon statement about the £12ph wasn’t about self employed drivers working directly for Amazon, but those working for their Delivery Providers, which I assume is corporate speak for a courier company.
An Amazon spokesmen said “Our delivery providers are expected to ensure drivers receive a minimum of £12ph before deductions excluding bonuses, incentives and fuel reimbursements”
There you go guys van drivers earn more money then us give it a crack on the vans at amazon lets us know how you do. 
AndrewG:
It may be £12 ph but being self employed surely theres fuel to deduct from this? Couple this with the additional vehicle running cost its got to work out a pittance…
As Albion sercastically remarked, “yeah right”, Amazon “expecting” their “transport provider” drivers to be £12 hr doesn’t prove he was actually on that.
Anyone got another source with more info on this?
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
Franglais:
AndrewG:
It may be £12 ph but being self employed surely theres fuel to deduct from this? Couple this with the additional vehicle running cost its got to work out a pittance…As Albion sercastically remarked, “yeah right”, Amazon “expecting” their “transport provider” drivers to be £12 hr doesn’t prove he was actually on that.
Anyone got another source with more info on this?Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
I found the statement hard to believe, which is why I asked how often they checked the pay of their courier companies.
It sounds like more corporate statements, like you get when somebody finds out that expensive designer clothing is made by children in Far East sweatshops and the offending company says it checks the conditions that its clothing contractors operate regularly.
Another thing in the article was DVSA was going to take an interest in the hours the drivers were working, but I bet a couple of couriers will be hammered as an example, but on the whole most will continue as they are and the likes of Amazon will keep coming out with statements like “We take road safety and the conditions our couriers work under seriously”. 
muckles:
Franglais:
AndrewG:
It may be £12 ph but being self employed surely theres fuel to deduct from this? Couple this with the additional vehicle running cost its got to work out a pittance…As Albion sercastically remarked, “yeah right”, Amazon “expecting” their “transport provider” drivers to be £12 hr doesn’t prove he was actually on that.
Anyone got another source with more info on this?Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
I found the statement hard to believe, which is why I asked how often they checked the pay of their courier companies.
It sounds like more corporate statements, like you get when somebody finds out that expensive designer clothing is made by children in Far East sweatshops and the offending company says it checks the conditions that its clothing contractors operate regularly.Another thing in the article was DVSA was going to take an interest in the hours the drivers were working, but I bet a couple of couriers will be hammered as an example, but on the whole most will continue as they are and the likes of Amazon will keep coming out with statements like “We take road safety and the conditions our couriers work under seriously”.
All together now:
“Yeah. Right” !
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
Isn’t the way these van drivers work similar to how the aggregate tipper franchisee’s work?
In that they are “self employed” but are still bound to amazon and can’t really work elsewhere? They’re pretty much at amazon’s mercy can’t find their own work and have to pay a premium to the courier agencies for using the van which is probably where the £12 per hr comes from?
There’s 2 types of Amazon couriers, both of which are self employed. Amazon Flex means you’re self employed, using your own car but directly for Amazon. Fairly good money but it’s only part time. My nephew is doing it and is left with around £15 per hour after fuel costs. For about 3 weeks in the run up to Christmas rates increased and he was earning well over £20 per hour after fuel.
The rest are self employed working through an agency, most of which have a very bad reputation about scamming drivers over wages and charging for non existent damage. Think some of them have a £2000 insurance excess and as they usually hold the first months wages they have the drivers by the balls. There’s no way those guys are earning £12 per hour. Their wages are around £110-£120 per day but they’ve to pay £200 per week to rent those new transporter vans and pay for the courier insurance. So about £500 in the bank for a 6 day week. They’ve some fuel money to come off that as well as they only get paid the fuel costs based on a certain mpg, which is completely unachievable when your racing around doing 180 deliveries a day. Those are the guys who make the news every December, crying about no time for lunch, having to pee in a bottle and work long hours.
I think some of you are missing the point about the £12ph statement, it implies that drivers employed by courier firms should be getting that as a basic rate, but if the drivers are self employed it doesn’t apply to them and as it seems most if not all drivers are defined as self employed the Amazon statement is worthless, but it makes them appear as if they give a toss about the couriers who are contracted to them.
muckles:
I think some of you are missing the point about the £12ph statement, it implies that drivers employed by courier firms should be getting that as a basic rate, but if the drivers are self employed it doesn’t apply to them and as it seems most if not all drivers are defined as self employed the Amazon statement is worthless, but it makes them appear as if they give a toss about the couriers who are contracted to them.
Yep just makes Amazon look like they care when in fact they farm the work out to agencies who treat drivers like dirt, but as its not Amazon directly their conscience is clear.