Frank Field attacks Gym Group’s use of self-employed contracts as ‘egregious’ in latest conflict with gig economy firms such as Uber

The controversy over workers being being pushed into “dubious” self-employment has been reignited, with a parliamentary committee accusing a leisure group of “egregious” use of such contracts.

The move comes as the ride-hailing firm Uber awaits a decision on its appeal against a landmark employment tribunal judgment last year, which ruled that the company’s drivers are not self-employed and should be paid the national living wage.

Apart from having no entitlement to minimum levels of pay, self-employed workers do not receive other employment benefits, such as paid holidays. The Uber case has been pounced on by critics, who argue that companies are increasingly exploiting such loopholes, particularly in the so-called gig economy.



On Thursday, parliament’s work and pensions committee said it had written to The Gym Group, an operator of 89 “low-cost” UK gyms, questioning why its contracts classify its personal trainers as self-employed when it places restrictions on what they can charge clients and when they can take holidays.

Frank Field MP, the committee chair, said: “This contract from Gym Group is the latest in a long line of examples highlighting dubious self-employed workforce models and it is one of the most egregious examples I’ve seen to date. It is packed full of clauses that clearly suggest Gym Group’s ‘freelance independent personal trainers’ are nothing of the sort, but are in fact workers entitled to the rights and protections that come with that status.

“I look forward to receiving Gym Group’s explanation of this state of affairs. But even more importantly, this contract, and the other examples we’ve received, demonstrate that the current system for protecting and enforcing workers’ rights is failing.”



Uber faces double battle against London ban and scrutiny of hiring practices Read more

The Gym Group said: “We take the feedback of our self-employed personal trainers who we partner with extremely seriously and we will be happy to cooperate and respond in full to the issues raised by the requested deadline of 10 November. Beyond that we have no further comment at this stage.”

Also on Thursday, the union Unite served a claim against ADR Network Limited, a temporary employment agency that supplies drivers in the logistics sector, and its holding company PPF Limited, on behalf of Gary Sharrock, a self-employed driver engaged by the firms.

The union argues Sharrock had to set up his own company to be awarded work by the firm, despite his job being the same as those employed as workers by the company.

Howard Beckett, Unite assistant general secretary for legal services, said the agency is using “bogus self-employment to avoid the basic right to holiday pay”, and accused ADR of “a brazen attempt” to circumvent the Agency Worker Regulations, which require agencies to pay temporary workers the same rates as a business’s employed workforce.

ADR Network and PPF said they believed the claim is “without merit” and that they would be “vigorously” defending it.