An 'Uber' Decision

The recent Uber Case Decision

On 28 October 2016 the London Central Employment Tribunal held that drivers engaged by Uber are not in fact self-employed contractors, but rather, they are ‘workers’. Clearly this new employment status has vast implications on Uber and similar companies that form part of the so-called ‘gig economy’.

Gig economy is a term given to the workforce in which someone is hired, usually through a digital platform, to work on demand, for a short-term engagement. Uber offers such a service via a mobile app which allows passengers to book a ride from their phone.

Before this decision, Uber's classification of drivers as self-employed contractors meant that they were not entitled to certain employment rights. However, the worker status brings with it an array of entitlement and now permits workers the following rights:

- Paid holiday leave;

- A maximum 48 hour average working week with rest breaks; and

- The national minimum wage.

Uber has always maintained that its drivers were categorised as self-employed contractors, as that was the status their drivers wanted. Indeed Uber engages its drivers with the tagline “Work for yourself, drive when you want, make the money you need”. Uber believed that its approach gave its drivers the flexibility to work as much or as little as they wanted. However, this recent ruling has highlighted the fact that contractual provisions regarding employment status are not necessarily definitive and may still be open to interpretation by a tribunal.

The common question of whether an individual is an employee, worker or self-employed contractor is not at all black and white. For years lawyers have debated this very issue and to date it remains impossible to outline a clear set of defining criteria against which an individual's status can be definitively determined.

• An employee is defined as "an individual who has entered into or works under a contract of employment".

• A worker is defined as an individual who has entered into or works under a contract of employment or any other contract, whereby the individual undertakes to do or perform personally any work or services for another party to the contract whose status is not by virtue of the contract that of a client or customer of any profession or business undertaking carried on by the individual.

Unfortunately, the distinction between the two is very blurred and so lawyers rely on a helpful test to assist in identifying employment status:

1) Personal service: Did the individual undertake under the contract to personally perform work or services?

2) Mutuality of obligation: was there mutuality of obligation between the individual and the "employer"?

3) Control: Was there control of the servant (individual) by the master (employer)?

Whilst this recent Uber decision is not binding, it has set a ground-breaking precedent that will most certainly impact all those working in the ‘gig economy’ and directly affect similar business models going forward.

Consequently, Uber drivers are now entitled to paid holiday, a decent living wage and regular paid breaks.

Unsurprisingly, Uber has confirmed that it will be seeking to appeal the decision. 

CONTACT KEELY

If you would like more information or advice relating to this article or an Employment law matter, please do not hesitate to contact Keely Rushmore on 01727 798046 

© SA LAW 2020

Every care is taken in the preparation of our articles. However, no responsibility can be accepted to any person who acts on the basis of information contained in them alone. You are recommended to obtain specific advice in respect of individual cases.

Read the latest Employment Views & Insights
They seek to understand their clients and advise accordingly to achieve the outcomes that they require for their business needs.
Chambers and Partners
SA Law Work Life red mug and glasses
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme: update affecting notice periods

The Treasury has published a further Direction to provide rules that will govern the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS). Most of the rules in the…

Read More
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme: Updated Guidance on Flexible Furloughing

Under the flexible furlough scheme, employees can work for some of the week and be furloughed for the rest, in proportions decided between employee and…

Read More
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme: Key changes between July – October 2020

Keely explores the key changes to the Covid-19 related furloughing that are set to impact employers and employees between July-October 2020.

Read More
Phone Box with Man in a Bowler Hat
As there is so much expertise on offer from SA Law they can provide a legal expert on all areas so that it can be handled under one roof.
Legal 500
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS) Direction and Extended Deadline

The Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme will be extended to 30 June 2020, plus The Treasury has also issued a Direction to HMRC which provides legally binding…

Read More
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
COVID-19 Right to Work Checks Adjustment

Adjustments made to Right to Work Checks process for employers during COVID-19.

Read More
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
Updated Furlough Guidance provides clarification for employers

Over the weekend the government updated its guidance for employers on the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS) - Keely Rushmore reports.

Read More
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
FAQs Furloughing Employees / Job Retention Scheme

Frequently asked questions on Furloughing Employees to help employers, line managers and employees – answered by SA Law’s employment team.

Read More
They are knowledgeable, with a commercial mindset, but also down to earth and friendly so it is easy to be very honest with them.
Chambers and Partners