header-logo header-logo

10 March 2021 / Charles Pigott
Issue: 7924 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

An Uber assessment

42002
Uber drivers may now be entitled to the protection of the working time & national minimum wage legislation, but not all gig economy workers will be able to establish claims for worker status, says Charles Pigott
  • The Supreme Court has affirmed the employment tribunal’s decision that a group of Uber drivers had the status of non-employee workers.
  • In doing so it has signalled a new approach to assessing employment status.

A small group of London-based Uber drivers started proceedings in the employment tribunal in 2015. Two of them, Mr Aslam and Mr Farrer, were selected as test claimants for a preliminary ruling. This was to establish whether they had worker status for the purposes of claims for the national minimum wage and for holiday pay under the Working Time Regulations 1998, SI 1998/1833.

The two main respondents were Uber BV, a Dutch company which owns the rights to the Uber app, and Uber London Limited, its UK subsidiary, which holds the licence to operate private hire vehicles in London. The name ‘Uber’ is used in the rest of this article

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll