The new Uber terms were meant to stamp out account renting. Unfortunately they do no such thing.

Uber have updated their Courier Terms for Uber Eats/Uber Direct. The new version (8 August 2024) replaces the old one (4 October 2022). As usual this comes with little explanation and drivers are only shown them when they try to go online, at which point they must be accepted before they can start work.

So we decided to go through in more detail so you don’t have to.

What has changed?

The main change relates to your right to ‘substitute’, i.e. let anyone else use your account. This is controversial but is allowed by all the major gig delivery companies. It opens the door to unchecked renting of accounts, with Reuters suggesting that as many as 42% of drivers are working illegally.

Last year the platforms were put in an uncomfortable position when the Home Office demanded and end to the practice, citing that it ‘cheats those with the right to work’, ‘is linked to… modern slavery’ and ‘places the security of the public at risk’. Ouch.

But they cannot remove the clause as this would risk drivers being classified as independent workers. It might also require them to increase fees. The results is a good old fashioned fudge.

On first inspection Uber appears to have actually made it easier to rent out your account. There are six ‘Key Principles’ highlighted at the top of the Terms to emphasise their importance. In 2022 the fifth one read:

If you choose to accept a Delivery Request, you will provide Delivery Services to Customers as a subcontractor of Uber Eats

The new version adds a second sentence:

You can appoint any person to perform the Delivery Services on your behalf for any reason and at any time, provided they meet the minimum safety conditions.

Any person, any reason, any time - that hardly sounds like clamping down on illegal substitutes. Especially as the ‘minimum safety conditions’ do not appear to be defined anywhere.

In clause 5 (a) they double down with new wording to emphasise that you can appoint literally anyone as a substitute.

The only suggestion that Uber might try to impose any controls comes in 5 (c). The original version read:

You are not required either to inform Uber Eats of your use of a substitute or to receive consent from Uber Eats.

This wording still appears but to it has been added:

We may require you to notify us if you have appointed a new substitute, only so that we can confirm that they have the right to legally work in the United Kingdom.

Note that they ‘may’ rather than they ‘will’ require you to tell them. And note that any checks are only related to the Right to Work so presumably criminal record (DBS) checks and insurance are unnecessary.

It is also unclear how Uber would know when to ask you if you were using a substitute given that there is no requirement to tell them. And, I’m no lawyer, but aren’t the two sentences in that paragraph directly contradictory? ‘You are not required…’ but ‘We may require you’.

Perhaps the first sentence is for the Employment Courts and the second for the Home Office. Let’s hope that neither of them read the other one!

Oh and, according to clause 5 (g), if you happen to be a victim of Human Trafficking, it is your responsibility to tell Uber or you will be in breach of their terms.

To be fair to Uber, they are not alone here - Deliveroo, Just Eat and Stuart have all taken similar approaches. We are simply using them as an example because they are the latest to update their terms.

What hasn’t changed?

Two notable clauses have been carried over from the old terms but are worth highlighting.

Clause 3 (c) reiterates that there are no limitations on multi-apping, including while you are ‘in the process of performing Delivery Services using the Courier App’.

This means Uber have no issues with you wandering into KFC and collecting a Just Eat and an Uber Eats order at the same time before stopping on the way to the customer to collect a Deliveroo order. Unsurprisingly restaurants often don’t feel the same way about their food doing a lap of the neighbourhood and their customer being kept waiting. We have even seen some merchants trying to prevent drivers from collecting multiple orders. Where this leaves the Uber terms, we don’t know.

Secondly, 7 (c) reaffirms that ‘Uber Eats reserves the right to change the Delivery Fee Calculation at any time in Uber Eats' absolute discretion.

They do add the more optimistic sounding: ‘Uber Eats will usually provide you with seven (7) days’ notice in the event of: (i) changes…’ before taking it away again: ‘…but Uber Eats reserves the right to implement such changes without notice.’

One of our ambitions at Rodeo is to make gig economy pay more transparent. We believe that independent workers deserve access to a transparent competitive market for their services. No one should have to reverse engineer an algorithm to check if they have had a pay cut. This is why drivers’ access to their earnings data is so important (ahem, Deliveroo).

For anyone wanting to nerd out here are the full versions of the new and old terms with the edits highlighted (thanks Draftable).