Working conditions in delivery services | Lieferando and Co.: “Organized diffusion of responsibility”

While Lieferando drivers have repeatedly fought for better working conditions, employees from other platforms are very few and far between. Photo: dpa/Lilli Förter Mr. Meiser, do you sometimes order food? And if so, how generous are you when it comes to tipping?

In fact, I personally never use this service. I don't think many people realize what a huge problem this is with poor working conditions and disastrous employment practices.

What do you criticize about the working conditions?

First of all, this is hard work that should not be underestimated. The drivers are on the roads under high time pressure in wind and weather. In addition, there are working conditions that obviously violate occupational safety and endanger health. Drivers are sometimes on bikes that are obviously not roadworthy. When problems arise, they are often left alone to deal with them. Working time violations and violations of the minimum wage are also regularly documented. A traditional employer must minimize the risk of accidents, protect the health of employees and ensure compliance with labor law. The large platforms Uber Eats, Wolt and, to some extent, Lieferando, however, deliberately shift this responsibility away from themselves.

Why are these platforms not traditional employers?

The sub-subcontractor structures are the premium variant with which the large platforms avoid their responsibilities. They are the standard at Uber Eats and Wolt. At Lieferando the picture is more mixed. Over the years, employees there have sometimes achieved permanent and direct employment relationships. However, under the pressure of Uber Eats and Wolt, we are once again experiencing a backward roll at Lieferando.

Where there are permanent positions, works councils can be formed, for example, which pay attention to occupational safety and working conditions. However, where work is carried out via subcontractor structures, we experience an organized diffusion of responsibility. In the end, the platforms can hardly be held liable for violations, even if they are discovered.

The platforms say they simply broker orders between a customer, a restaurant and a delivery service. You do not provide the delivery services yourself. There are formally independent companies for this purpose, which in turn employ other subcontractors. At the end of the chain there are sometimes also solo self-employed people. The platforms take the position that they are not employers themselves and can thus ignore numerous obligations. At the same time, anyone who walks through the city with their eyes open can see that the drivers operate under the brand names of the major platforms. The specifications for the drivers also come from the platforms and their algorithms. In fact, it is simply a formal legal shift of responsibility.

In the 19th century, Karl Marx described the doubly free wage worker: free to sell his labor, but also free from his own means of production. Are the workers in platform capitalism essentially triple free – i.e. “freed” from a normal employee relationship including a boss?

There can be no question of freedom for delivery service drivers. In individual cases you may be legally independent. But everything they have to do to get their money is dictated down to the smallest detail by the platforms and their algorithms. The times they have to make their deliveries and their behavior are closely monitored.

When people talk about platform capitalism, many people think of tech companies and software. But the work we are talking about here is also taking place on the streets, stairs and front doors in front of all of us. It is hard physical work that, through legal tricks, only creates a new form of dependency with a high degree of economic lack of freedom and direct surveillance.

Are there no efforts to change this situation politically?

I have been working very intensively on the topic for a good six years, and we on the left have repeatedly initiated debates about it in the Bundestag. At the same time, we have repeatedly heard from the changing federal labor ministers that the situation in the industry is untenable. But not much has happened yet. However, we are currently seeing a lot of movement in the debate because a resolution by the Federal Council now calls on the federal government to, among other things, ensure a direct employment offer in the industry.

The companies would have to hire the drivers themselves and thus assume responsibility as employers. This is important because the control authorities are obviously unable to enforce even the simplest legal standards in these non-transparent subcontractor structures. It is therefore not enough to work on the surface with a few additional measures. We have to get to the structures.

How likely is it that the federal government will follow the request?

Immediately after the Federal Council's decision in the Labor and Social Affairs Committee, we asked the federal government for a statement. The answer was that a direct employment requirement for this sector was being further examined. This is initially a good sign: the demand is not off the table. But of course there is no white smoke over the Bundestag yet. There is massive resistance at the federal level, especially from the Union, even though six CDU-led state governments in the Bundesrat have approved this decision.

Beyond this, the European Platform Directive must be implemented into German law by the end of the year. It contains guidelines for improving the working conditions of platform employees that go far beyond the delivery industry. However, we must not lose sight of the particular problem faced by food delivery services.

You have already mentioned industrial disputes in the industry. What are the specific problems and peculiarities?

Since the industry has boomed, there have been a number of employees who have banded together and tried to improve their working conditions. They organize themselves, for example, in the NGG union or locally. There are big differences between the platforms. At Lieferando, despite difficult working conditions, there are opportunities to fight for improvements. For example, employees were able to turn temporary jobs into permanent employment relationships and set up works councils. Together with the NGG, you have been fighting for a collective agreement for a long time.

In the case of Wolt and Uber Eats, which basically rely entirely on chains of subcontractors, some of which even work with mafia-like structures, it is actually impossible to develop seriously organized counter-power. In many cases, the prerequisites are missing to even reach employees. There is also strong fragmentation and isolation here. There are hardly any collective spaces where employees come together.

Many drivers have a migration background. What role does this play in your situation?

Many employees come to Germany from India and Pakistan with great expectations, sometimes even with false expectations. Many people want to study here. We often deal with employees who are clearly overqualified, but for whom this work is the only way to finance their studies and the debts they had to take on to travel to Germany. The fear of losing your job is therefore great. The willingness to defend oneself is often correspondingly low. Many fear that they will end up empty-handed and have to leave Germany again. This special dependency and vulnerability is massively exploited by large companies.

In addition, there are dubious placement agencies that arrange both study places and jobs with subcontractors. The actual reason why young people come to Germany – to study – is often pushed into the background. The extreme vulnerability of people from other countries is specifically exploited here. In this sense, of course, it also has a racist note.

Our focus is on ending the non-transparent subcontractor structures. The way to get there is clearly through a legal direct employment requirement for platform-based food delivery services. We already submitted a corresponding proposal to the Bundestag at the beginning of the year. We have already implemented such a regulation in the meat industry. There, too, the working conditions were catastrophic and occupational health and safety were not guaranteed. Food delivery services must now also be regulated according to this model. Minimum wages, maximum working hours and occupational safety are regulated by law. The problem, however, is that applicable labor law is systematically ignored in this industry. We need regulations that make this much more difficult.

The latest Federal Council decision now provides further momentum to continue to apply pressure in the coming months to ensure that decent working conditions are finally made possible in the course of the implementation of the European Platform Directive, especially in food delivery services. We work very closely with active employees, the existing works councils and the NGG union. Because together you can put a lot more pressure on and be successful in the end.

Can consumers also do something?

In my view, the responsibility lies primarily with politicians. It must create laws so that this form of labor exploitation is no longer possible. But of course every customer can do something. The first thing is to show respect to the people delivering the food and, if you can afford it, tip them. Anyone who uses a delivery service should also take a closer look at the providers. In my opinion, the situation with Uber Eats and Wolt is underground. At Lieferando there are at least approaches to working according to law and order. And of course everyone can support the political fight for decent working conditions in the industry.

This article cost you nothing. Us: research, production and technology. We saved on office rent as well as printing and distribution. And we gave up salary. Nevertheless, the calculation doesn't work without you. We need 300,000 euros by the end of the year. You pay what you can, in return we keep writing.

No paywall, no small print, just one goal: that nd stays.