header-logo header-logo

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

Uber & out

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll