Ian Smith examines the recent cases that have been driving employment law
- Could Aslam v Uber BV be the first case to make use of the recently-introduced power to send an appeal from the EAT directly to the Supreme Court as a “leap-frog”?
- Including commission in statutory holiday pay—the latest from the Court of Appeal
- Communicating a dismissal—the sound of silence.
The most newsworthy development in October was of course the widely reported decision of an ET in Aslam v Uber BV Case no 220550/2015 that two Uber taxi drivers were not self-employed, but were “workers” for the purposes of claims for the minimum wage and working time rights. This was reported as bringing not just the basic Uber business model into question, but also other examples of what is increasingly known colloquially as the “gig economy”; the media also reported the imminence of other employment tribunal cases relating to similar areas such as delivery and courier services. Not surprisingly, the backing union hailed it as a major precedent,
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e2ed053c_1)
