With drivers running cabs for Ola and Uber protesting for better work conditions, the Delhi High Court on Monday sought a response from the two cab aggregators and also the Centre and Delhi governments on a petition moved by drivers’ union demanding “freedom from exploitation” and benefits under labour laws.
Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva issued notices to Uber India Systems Limited, ANI technologies, the Union Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, the Union Ministry of Labour and Employment, the Delhi Labour Department and Delhi Transport Department.
Fundamental rights
The petition, filed by Delhi Commercial Drivers’ Union that comprises over 1.5 lakh drivers in Delhi and NCR, said the drivers were “being subjected to exploitation everyday with respect to their pay and service conditions, and denied benefits under several labour laws as well as their fundamental rights by Uber and Ola.
Petitioner’s counsel Shoumendu Mukherji and Akash Vajpai said there was no clarity if these drivers were employees of Uber and Ola in India. The drivers were held as employees in places like California and London.
He highlighted how drivers plying cabs for these companies don’t even have the security of compensation in case of an accident or compensation to their kin in case of their death during the course of employment.
Demand for panel
They have demanded constitution of a committee to look into their service conditions and to ensure implementation of labour laws. The petition also sought action against “arbitrary and whimsical alteration in payment terms and service conditions of the drivers on daily basis without prior notice”.
Demanding revision in minimum fares and bringing back of bonuses that were on offer in the initial days, the petition said: “Once the customer makes a booking, respondent no. 5-6 [Uber and Ola] by using their internal systems, searches for registered drivers available around the customer’s location. The respondent no. 5-6 exercise their sole discretion in selecting a driver to service the ride. The element of freedom and independent decision-making on part of the driver is non-existent in the entire sequence of actions. The chargeable fare keeps varying on a daily basis on the whims of the respondent no.5-6. No prior notice is given to the driver in this regard. Drivers’ also have to suffer arbitrary deductions in their payments on vague and unsubstantiated grounds, without even giving them a chance to respond.”
