Evri’s Pay Model Puts the UK Minimum Wage to the Test
A BBC Panorama investigation broadcast in December 2025 has triggered renewed scrutiny of Evri’s pay-per-parcel courier model, raising questions not just about missing parcels, but about whether the system can reliably comply with UK minimum wage law in practice.
While Evri insists its couriers earn well above legal thresholds, worker testimony, undercover reporting, and parliamentary concern suggest a widening gap between how pay is designed and how it is experienced.
At the centre of the debate is a deceptively simple question: when delivery work is paid by output rather than time, who carries the legal risk if earnings fall short?
What You Need to Know
Evri couriers are typically classified as self-employed and paid per parcel delivered rather than per hour.
The company says this ensures average earnings well above the National Living Wage, which rose to £12.21 per hour in April 2025.
Couriers and MPs dispute that claim once unpaid time, fuel, vehicle costs, and mislabelled parcels are taken into account.
UK minimum wage law allows piecework, but only if real hourly earnings meet statutory thresholds once all working time is counted.
Why This Is the Big Unanswered Question
Public frustration has understandably centred on parcels that never arrive. Yet beneath those complaints sits a more fundamental unease about how modern delivery work is actually structured.
When couriers are paid only once a parcel is scanned as delivered, large parts of the working day effectively disappear from the pay equation.
Time spent loading vans, navigating unfamiliar routes, attempting redeliveries, or dealing with misbanded items becomes economically invisible, even though it is essential to getting the job done.
That reality leads many readers, often instinctively, to a sharper question the breaking news could not fully answer: does the law meaningfully protect workers in systems where speed and volume are the difference between earning a living and falling short?
The Panorama investigation captured the pressure, frustration and corner-cutting that can follow, but it left unresolved how UK rules actually treat “working time” in piece-rate delivery roles, whether unpaid depot work and failed delivery attempts should count toward wage calculations, how fuel, insurance and vehicle costs reshape real earnings, and why mislabelled parcels distort the assumptions behind per-parcel pay.
These unanswered points matter because minimum wage compliance is not judged by headline rates or averages, but by what workers take home once all the hidden labour is accounted for.
The Legal and Regulatory Context Behind the Headlines
Under the National Minimum Wage Act 1998 and the National Minimum Wage Regulations 2015, employers may pay workers by output rather than by time.
However, the law is explicit that average pay must still meet or exceed the statutory hourly minimum once all working time is considered. This includes time spent on tasks that are necessary to perform the job, even if they are not directly paid.
Enforcement responsibility sits with HMRC, which has the power to investigate, issue penalties, and publicly name employers found to be underpaying.
In practice, enforcement is far more complex when workers are labelled self-employed. Companies argue that independent contractors control their schedules and costs, while workers often describe tightly defined routes, delivery targets, and performance monitoring.
UK courts have repeatedly shown a willingness to look beyond contractual language. High-profile cases involving Uber and Pimlico Plumbers have established that economic reality, not job titles, determines legal protections.
While Evri couriers have not been universally reclassified, the legal principles underpinning those rulings continue to cast a long shadow over gig-economy logistics.
What Independent Experts Typically Say About Systems Like This
Labour economists generally note that piecework systems become unstable when variable costs are shifted onto workers without corresponding pricing power.
In delivery logistics, time variability is high and margins are thin, which increases the likelihood that workers absorb unpaid labour to maintain earnings.
Employment law scholars also tend to emphasise that minimum wage compliance is outcome-based. It is not enough for a company to model average earnings above the legal floor; what matters is whether individuals actually achieve that outcome once real-world frictions are accounted for.
As delivery volumes scale, that gap often widens rather than shrinks.
Where This Goes From Here
In the short term, the pressure on Evri is likely to remain political rather than legal. In January 2025, the chair of the House of Commons Business and Trade Committee openly questioned whether the company’s earlier assurances on courier pay still stand, signalling that parliamentary scrutiny could intensify even if no formal action follows immediately.
Whether that scrutiny turns into enforcement is far from certain. HMRC investigations are often slow and complex, particularly where employment status is disputed and pay is structured around output rather than hours.
Yet the wider implications are harder to dismiss. If large-scale, low-cost delivery increasingly relies on models that struggle to demonstrate minimum wage compliance when examined closely, attention may begin to shift away from individual companies and toward the adequacy of the regulatory framework itself.
The deeper issue, as this analysis suggests, is not simply whether Evri has crossed a legal line, but whether the law is evolving quickly enough to reflect the realities of last-mile delivery work today.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is paying couriers per parcel legal in the UK?
Yes. Piecework is lawful, but only if average earnings meet minimum wage requirements once all working time is counted.
Who enforces minimum wage compliance?
HMRC is responsible for enforcement and has the power to investigate and penalise underpayment.
Does self-employed status remove minimum wage protections?
It can limit protections, but courts increasingly examine the reality of working arrangements rather than contractual labels.
Why do delivery firms use this model?
Per-parcel pay reduces fixed costs and shifts risk, which supports low consumer prices but increases worker volatility.
Could this affect other delivery companies?
Yes. Any firm relying on similar models may face increased scrutiny if enforcement standards tighten.
