THE UNITED Davao Delivery Riders Association (UDDRA) pushes anew their call to be exempted from securing a business permit, saying the requirement only imposes “undue financial and administrative burdens.”
UDDRA in a position paper submitted to the office of the Councilor Jesus Joseph Zozobrado dated Oct. 15, 2024, reiterated their call of strong opposition against the requirement.
“Food delivery riders do not own or operate businesses; they provide essential services under the control of delivery platforms. Requiring them to obtain business permits would impose undue financial and administrative burdens, potentially harming their livelihoods and the broader economy,” the position paper reads.
It added to the financial burden the riders are already facing, including but not limited to operational costs such as fuel, vehicle maintenance, and mobile data charges – which are covered out of their earnings.
Adding the cost of a business permit affects riders, reducing their take-home pay and potentially driving some out of the industry, which has an implication to local restaurants that depend on delivery platforms.
The practice, it stressed, is “irregular and backward” compared to other metropolitan cities such as Metro Manila, Cebu, Baguio, and Cagayan de Oro, which do not require food delivery to obtain such permits.
The riders’ association stands firm with their call that they are employees of delivery platforms, not business owners citing the Supreme Court ruling in Ditiangkin et al vs Lazada (2022), that the riders who filed a case for illegal dismissal were regular employees of Lazada, and riders were dependent on Lazada for their continued employment. The same finding was upheld in Fuentes et al. vs. Lazada E-Services (2023).
In Carrillo et al., vs FoodPanda Philippines, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed a ruling on Dec. 7, 2023, recognizing seven Davao City-based riders of online food delivery service provider Foodpanda Philippines as regular employees.
The decisions stress that riders operate under the protocols of the platforms –routes they take, the timing of deliveries, and the standards of service – hereby disqualifying them as business owners.
“They do not engage in the sale of goods or services to the public but merely deliver products sold by the platform or third-party vendors,” it added.
The group urged the local government of Davao City rather than requiring them to obtain business permits, compliance of delivery platforms with business regulations, and enhancing riders’ welfare through appropriate protections and support must be ensured.
The position paper was considered read in the first reading during the 20th city council’s 39th regular session on Tuesday.
Councilor Pilar Braga in a privilege speech on Tuesday expressed support for the delivery riders, stressing that obtaining the permit “threatens their livelihoods and misrepresents the nature of their work.”
Zozobrado reported that the matter is already under the committee level of Trade and Commerce chaired by Councilor Myrna Dalodo-Ortiz.
Councilor Bernard Al-ag called the committee to fast-track the passage of the ordinance considering the renewal of business permits is approaching.
To note, Al-ag in January proposed the passage of a resolution and ordinance to repeal Ordinance No. 0612-21 to institutionalize their exemption from paying fees.
It can be noted that the ordinance passed in 2021 categorized all food delivery riders as individual service contractors and therefore, must secure business permits.
Al-ag stressed that the riders should be exempted as what is stated in the Joint Memorandum Circular (JMC) No. 1 Series of 2021 or the Guidelines for Processing Business Permits, which was jointly issued by Anti Red Tape Authority, Department of Trade and Industry, Department of Interior and Local Government and Department of Information and Communications and Technology.
Section 6.2.2 of the JMC states that “business permits shall not be required from individuals or those registered in the Securities and Exchange Commission, as a One Person Corporation who provides personal services that do not fall under the exercise of a profession; provided further that, the individual does not occupy a permanent work or retail space, whether inside the residence or in any commercial space.”
