Technology is known to cause disruption of established businesses. However, the recent agitation by Uber and Ola Cab drivers which was waiting to happen for quite some time may disrupt technology. India is the second country after the United Kingdom in the world which would now be compelled to resolve the tussle between technology and labor. It...
Technology is known to cause disruption of
established businesses. However, the recent
agitation by Uber and Ola Cab drivers which
was waiting to happen for quite some time may
disrupt technology. India is the second country
after the United Kingdom in the world which would now
be compelled to resolve the tussle between technology and
labor. It is often said that technology trumps the law as a
number of techno issues arise from the fact that the existing
laws are not synced with evergrowing technology.
At the outset, it may be puzzling as to how the protest by
Cab drivers for minimum wages in any manner is related
to technology? It has been the stand of Uber Technologies
before the Employment Tribunal in UK
1 that it was a
technology firm not a transport business and that its drivers
were independent and self-employed contractors who were
free to choose where and when they worked. The Judges
however viewed the arguments of Uber with skepticism and
observed that the firm "resorting in its documentation to
fictions, twisted language and even brand new terminology"
and summed up by referring to Queen Gertrude's quote
"The
lady doth protest too much, methinks2."
The Employment
Tribunal rebuffed the arguments of Uber that it is only the
technology provider (Cab aggregator) and does not control
the drivers who are “self-employed”. The Judgment by the
Employment Tribunal was hailed by drivers as they were
guaranteed minimum service conditions; however, the
question remained on the viability of business models
where companies were using technology-based applications
for the benefit of the public at large. The present agitation
is only the tip of the iceberg waiting to explode as there
has been a mushrooming of app-based aggregators; be it
in food, transportation, housing, etc. The aggregators like
Airbnb and Stayzilla, etc. may also face similar kind of
protests.
Absence of unambiguous labor laws and whether the
traditional interpretation given to the said laws by the Court
would be able to keep up with technology are some of the
burning questions which concern the aggregators and start-
ups. There are also concerns about the applicability of labor
laws on "Self Controlled" and "Self-employed" workers
who may be working under somebody’s umbrella but still
control their own activities. Law will never be able to catch
up with technology as development and progress of each is
at uncontrollably contrasting velocities. We all know that
law takes not only its own course but also moves at its
own pace. In the year 1960, Gorden Moore, Co-founder of
Intel, predicted about exponential rise of integrated circuits
that the number of transistors that could fit on a chip.
Moore's prediction was his foresight for the rapid growth in
technology in near future which has been accurate till date.
Supreme Court back in year 2006 in the matter of
State of
Punjab versus Amritsar Beverages Limited3 made very
pertinent observations (in the context of Sales Tax Act 1948
but principles laid down can guide future legislations and
decisions of Courts). It held that:
"The Act was enacted in the year 1948. Information
Technology at that time far from being developed was
unknown. Constitution of India is a living organ. It had
been interpreted differently having regard to different
societal situations. [See Liverpool & London S.P. & I
Association Ltd. v. M.V. Sea Success I and Another, (2004)
9 SCC 512, Union of India v. Naveen Jindal and Another,
(2004) 2 SCC 510, John Vallamattom and Another v. Union
of India, (2003) 6 SCC 1, and Kapila Hingorani v. State
of Bihar, (2003) 6 SCC 1] Same principle is applicable in
respect of some statutes.
Creative interpretation had been resorted to by the Court
so as to achieve a balance between age old and rigid laws
on the one hand and advanced technology, on the other.
The Judiciary always responds to the need of the changing
scenario in regard to development of technologies. It uses
its own interpretative principles to achieve a balance when
Parliament has not responded to the need to amend the
statute having regard to the developments in the field of
science.”
However, the courts should be able to shed their inherent
conservatism and be able to decide the cases within
reasonable timeframe before the technology becomes
obsolete. The first case concerning technology in work place
was decided in
"City of Ontario, California Versus Quon"
a case decided in the year 2010 that addressed the question
of privacy rights to the messages on the pagers given to
the Police officers by their employers – pager technology by
2010 had already become obsolete.
The ongoing agitation cannot be brushed away as it has
the potential of disrupting technology and consequently,
economic business models. It is important that the
Parliament carries out amendments in labor laws
imbibing technology-related issues and at the same time,
the Courts should endeavor to strike a balance between
the grant of minimum service conditions and growing
technology.
Footnote:
1. https://www.judiciary.gov.uk.
2. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks" is a quotation from the c.
1600 play Hamlet by William Shakespeare. It has been
used as a figure of speech, in various phrasings, to describe someone's overly frequent and vehement attempts to convince others of some matter of which the
opposite is true, thereby making themselves appear defensive and insincere.[not verified in body] In rhetorical terms, the phrase can be thought of as indicating
an unintentional apophasis—where the speaker who "protests too much" in favor of some assertion puts into others' minds the idea that the assertion is false,
something that they may not have considered before.
3. 2006(7)SCC607.
Disclaimer
– The views expressed in this article are the personal views of the author and are purely informative in nature.