header-logo header-logo

Uber & out

11 November 2016 / Hester Jewitt
Issue: 7722 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail
nlj_7722_jewitt

Uber drivers have been ruled to be “workers” not self-employed contractors: Hester Jewitt reports

  • For businesses which rely on self-employed contractors, the Aslam decision gives pause for thought.

The wait is over. The employment tribunal in Aslam and ors v Uber BV and ors Case 2202551/2015 has decided that Uber drivers are “workers” not self-employed contractors and should be entitled to the national minimum wage, rest breaks, holiday pay and whistleblower protection.

Impact could be far-reaching

The impact of the Aslam decision is likely to be far-reaching, not just for Uber but the wider gig economy. Uber alone has about 40,000 drivers and other businesses operating similar business models could also be at risk of claims.

Following the decision, Deliveroo has received a request for union recognition and workers’ rights on behalf of its riders.

While Aslam is a first instance decision and so not binding on other tribunals; it raises the profile of false self-employment. Last month, the government launched an inquiry into the employment status of those working in the gig economy. Following

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll