McDonald’s has opened a heated waiting room for Wolt couriers at its Autotalo restaurant in central Helsinki, giving delivery riders a place to sit and charge their phones between orders, Helsingin Sanomat reports.
The room, near Kamppi, includes heating, a bench, a collection counter and an electrical socket. It does not have a toilet. Couriers interviewed by HS said the space becomes useful when they face longer waits between deliveries or work during cold weather.
Wolt courier Jamiu Dauda told the newspaper that few restaurants provide rooms intended for delivery workers, although some allow couriers to sit at customer tables. Shopping centres also provide places where riders spend short breaks.
Dauda said he had encountered dedicated courier rooms mainly at McDonald’s restaurants.
The issue carries added weight during the Finnish winter. Couriers spend much of their working day moving between restaurants and customers, leaving them dependent on public buildings, restaurants and other indoor spaces when temperatures fall.
Wolt does not provide dedicated break facilities because the company regards its couriers as entrepreneurs, according to HS. Wolt Finland country manager Anna Klaile told the newspaper in January that permanent rest facilities had not been found for couriers. She said riders have access to toilets at Wolt’s headquarters opposite Autotalo.
None of the couriers interviewed by HS said they used the headquarters for breaks.
The employment status of Wolt couriers remains disputed in Finland. Wolt continues to treat couriers working under its platform model as entrepreneurs, while a Supreme Administrative Court ruling in May 2025 found that couriers working under the model met the legal criteria for employees.
Wolt sought to overturn the ruling, but the Supreme Administrative Court rejected its application in March 2026. Despite the decisions, most couriers continue to work as entrepreneurs, according to the Service Union United PAM.
In September, PAM and the Finnish Transport Workers’ Union AKT asked the Parliamentary Ombudsman to examine whether occupational safety and health authorities had properly supervised Wolt following the court rulings. The unions argued that authorities should intervene when couriers continue to work under arrangements that the court found met the characteristics of an employment relationship.
The distinction also affects responsibility for working conditions. Employees receive protections and rights under employment legislation, while Wolt’s classification of couriers as entrepreneurs means the company does not regard itself as responsible for providing them with dedicated break facilities.
HT
