Deliveroo stands as a sure thing!

An earlier blog post dealt with the distinction between being a self-employed worker and an employee. In a recent ruling at the Amsterdam Court of Appeal, we see Deliveroo's viewpoints in action again. A dispute had arisen whether lap dances and private dance shows were performed as self-employed or as employees. There was no question of ‘self-employment’ here according to the court and the subdistrict court. 

The woman worked as an entertainment artist in a club where she performed pole dance acts and (private) lap dances, among other things. She was employed by Tempo-Team and was loaned to the club as a temporary worker. Normally, the woman worked from 8pm to 2am on weekdays and until 3am on weekends. However, the woman received pay for only four hours. The remaining hours worked were deemed to have been performed as if the woman were self-employed, with the income she received for the lap dances, for example, being regarded as ‘tips’.

First, the court noted that the woman was required to be present for six or seven hours daily. To assess whether these activities were performed in the context of an employment contract, the court applies the now well-known Deliveroo catalogue of points of view. It follows that the fact that the club drew up written instructions on, among other things, attendance, length of lap dances and approaching customers shows few characteristics of self-employment.

Furthermore, the woman was not allowed to take a break or leave the shop floor without the club's permission, was not allowed to take customers to other locations and was ‘coached’ on her sales techniques if drink sales were lagging. 

The club's claim that there was a clear separation between the work she performed as an employee and as a self-employed person was not followed by the court for these reasons. That the self-employed income was defined as ‘tips’ does not change this. In short, when all was said and done, all the hours worked fell under an employment contract.

We see in this case yet another reason to keep following our blogs. After all, according to the ‘HOUSE RULES’, the woman had to be downstairs in full make-up at 8pm. Now let us have published a blog titled: ‘CAUTION: preparation time is working time!’ on 8 October 2024. On that basis, one could argue that the time for doing make-up counts as working time, for which, in principle, the woman should also receive pay. Whether that was an issue here is not clear from the ruling, but you could make a point of it.

Click on the link for the full ruling.
If you have any questions, please contact Dennis Oud, Tessa Sipkema, Elke Hofman or Tim van Riel.