The delivery platform used self-employed delivery people. For the prosecution, these were actually salaried jobs.
by
This is the umpteenth trial of a delivery platform. But it has an unprecedented scent because it is the first time that it calls into question a company today 100 % owned by a public group. Before the Paris judicial court, on September 15, 16, 22 and 23, the Stuart company, a subsidiary of the post office in six countries and 125 cities, and its former manager, Benjamin Chemla, were to answer for work of concealed in France. Also appeared the ex-partner of Mr. Chemla, Clément Benoît, founder of the Resto in meal delivery platform, now disappeared.
Stuart is suspected of having had an employee relationship with his couriers when they were officially related to the independent status of autoentrepreneur. The facts date back to 2015 and 2016. At the time, Mr. Chemla launched Stuart with the hope of “conquering Europe” by offering small merchants to deliver meals like packages to their customers, faced with competition fierce of the Amazon giant. In any case, this is the story that defendants make in court.
At the hearing, Mr. Chemla wishes to distinguish himself from platforms like Deliveroo, condemned in July for similar facts of concealed work. “Stuart has nothing to do with this kind of platform,” says the 30-year-old. Stuart is “different”, he insists, because it is “a French model” and, unlike the platforms that relate an individual and a delivery man, Stuart puts in contact “a donor of Order which is none other than Franprix or Pizza Hut, and a professional who wishes to have been delivered “.
a” free “model
Throughout the debates, the defendants have tried to defend the technological nature of the platform, “a computer tool of transmission” which guarantees the independence of deliveryers thanks to the “free” mode of the application, which Let the autoentrepreneurs choose their racing area and their schedules.
A demonstration that did not seem to convince the court. With the testimonies of couriers read at the hearing, Stuart actually appeared as the principal principal of the delivery people: reminder to order following delays in delivery, deactivation of account in the event of rejection of reiterated race, Training sessions provided to instill “behavior” to adopt …
One of the deliverers, who always works for the platform, came to testify at the audience. In particular, there have been traffic guidelines or the cancellations of races imposed by the platform. His story undermined the “free” model behind which Mr. Chemla took refuge: the courier must actually honor two thirds of the races offered to him under penalty of receiving a warning, and being disconnected from the network After two warnings.
You have 40.66% of this article to read. The continuation is reserved for subscribers.