Duty of care and the car your employee gets into

Duty of care is the principle that an employer takes reasonable steps to protect employees travelling on its business. It is well understood for flights and accommodation. It is much less consistently applied to the car that takes a partner to the airport at half past five in the morning.

Why the distinction is not academic

A commercially licensed operator carries commercial auto liability and workers' compensation covering the chauffeur, and can produce certificates naming your entity. A platform connecting independent contractors has a different structure, and the coverage that applies depends on the app's state at the moment of an incident. That is a difference your risk function cares about even when nothing goes wrong.

Who is driving, and do you know in advance

A vetted chauffeur named on the confirmation before the trip is auditable. A stranger assigned at the moment of the request is not. For most trips this is irrelevant. For a late-night pickup of a junior employee, or a senior executive travelling with sensitive material, it is the whole point.

The questions procurement actually asks

Are you commercially licensed in this jurisdiction, and can you show it. Do you carry workers' compensation on the drivers. Can you issue a certificate of insurance naming our entity as additional insured. How are drivers screened. Who answers at three in the morning. An operator who cannot answer these in writing has not been through the process before.

The policy sentence worth writing

Most of the value here comes from one line in your travel policy that distinguishes prearranged commercial ground transport from consumer ride-hailing, and says which is expected for which circumstances. It does not need to ban anything. It needs to make the choice conscious rather than incidental.