Way of life of 500,000 people is at stake with regulation of work on platforms: Rappi

Faced with the potential regulation of the work carried out by delivery people and drivers of platforms such as Rap, Uber, Didi y Beat based on a possible reform from the Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare (STPS), these companies have shown their openness to dialogue with the authorities, although they maintain certain reservations regarding demands such as the recognition of an employer-employee relationship within their business model.

Before the summer Rap I had several meetings with the STPS and the IMSS and since the legislative process was restarted, the company has attended around four meetings with the authorities regarding the will of the federal government to present a labor reform regarding the work of delivery men and drivers of this type of platform.

Fernando Cota, Director of Policies and Public Affairs of Rappi in Mexico, insists that company deliverers and drivers are not company workers, but one of its various users, who are self-employed through its platform. In interview with The Economistthe representative of the Colombian company said that what is at stake with legislation is “the way of life of more than half a million people.”

─A few days ago, the Secretary of Labor, María Luisa Alcalde, said that a labor reform was required with the consensus of the delivery men and that of the companies. Is Rappi willing to seek that consensus? Has the STPS approached Rappi or has Rappi sought to approach the secretariat?

─Yes, we are totally open to dialogue with the Secretariat. We believe that it is very opportune to do so, so we have to talk both with the companies that are involved, but of course also with the delivery men and drivers, who are the ones on the street and those who experience this on a day-to-day basis and, in the end, because what we are going to do they are going to be the protagonists and the first that we have to consider is them

Yes, we have been in communication with both the Secretariat and the IMSS, we are in a dialogue process.

─What is Rappi’s relationship with the couriers? How does the company communicate with them? Has there been any rapprochement with the courier organizations in the country?

─Dividing the question into two parts: one has to do with the model in which it operates Rap, which is to intermediate between three types of users. On the one hand, there are the shops and restaurants that offer their products and their food. On the other hand, there are the end users, like you and me, who ask in Rap our supermarket or dinner and, finally, the delivery men, who are also users of the platform in that sense. We try in Rap give the best value and the best options to all users and, in that sense, also to delivery people.

Yes, we have been in dialogue with the delivery men, we do so continuously and particularly with groups like Not a delivery man less. We have also had some approaches to understand what their concerns are and what things we can do from Rappi to improve what we offer them.

─What are the conditions for Rappi to accept a reform that adds digital platform workers as a category of the federal labor law?

We believe that there are things that can be done to improve the well-being of delivery people and so that at the time they carry out this occupation, I insist, not as workers, but as people who use the platforms for self-employment, they can have better conditions.

something of what Rap It has already been that, in the time in which people are busy on the platforms, we offer them a broad coverage insurance, which protects them against accidents, against disability and gives them life insurance.

We understand that there is a debate when it comes to thinking about what else can be done and particularly, if a Social Security scheme could be achieved and that is where we are still in a process of dialogue, to see what the best arrangement could be. that benefits delivery drivers, but also allows them to maintain a flexible model.

─The workers and the government, at least in the words of the Secretary Mayor, seek three basic demands: recognition as a worker on the platform, complete social security for the worker and that employment flexibility be preserved, what do you think of these three demands? ?

─What would you say that it is important to listen to the deliverers and drivers as a whole. Data that we have, that the secretariat itself has given, estimates that there are half a million people employed in this sector and in this sense, it must be said that what is at stake is the way of life of these half a million people who work across the platforms.

If we see something that represents a broad consensus among these people, it is that more than 80% are here for flexibility and more than 66% would stop working on the platforms if they lose that flexibility. Most delivery drivers and drivers work as a way to supplement their income and even save.

In that sense, what I would think is that you have to listen to all the distributors. What the surveys tell us is that the fundamental thing for them is flexibility and, therefore, what we are going to do has to help us preserve this flexibility, not necessarily work. I think that the statement that the delivery men want to be employees of the platforms is not supported, probably in some cases it is, but the vast majority do not want it.

─Uber’s representative before the Mexican government said a few days ago that there were legislative alternatives, such as a dual model similar to the one that operates in Chile, what would be the ideal regulation for Rappi if there is one?

─We are not married and we do not want to say: “this is the path to follow”. We believe that the experiences of other countries bring positive and negative things. Maybe I would tell you that there are things we should avoid, for example, what has happened in Spain or Switzerland. The so-called Rider Law in both countries, because it was done exactly as it should not be done, which is in a hasty way, without considering the interests of delivery people and drivers, contracted between a third and a half of the market, thus causing a destruction of opportunities very important.

─What could cause a regulation that does not include the consensus of the companies in the drivers and delivery people and in the company’s business model? Is Rappi’s operation in Mexico at risk if labor legislation is finalized?

─I don’t want to put myself in that scenario of talking about there being a risk, because in reality what we are seeing is intended to reach a good result and to dialogue so that, in the end, this will benefit the sector and the dealers. But I do want to point out some data: one is that two out of three delivery people want to maintain flexibility to the point that these two delivery people would leave the model if they lose that flexibility; Another thing is that hiring has to remain very dynamic. Nowadays, all you have to do is download an application, register and, in a couple of hours, you can already grab a backpack and start distributing and generating income and if we put ourselves in a more traditional scheme, this would change its dynamic, what they have indicated with their actions and statements that they do not want.

rodrigo.riquelme@eleconomista.mx