• Send us a message

    Fill in our form and we'll get back to you as soon as possible

    Please enter name
    Please enter your telephone number
    Please enter your email address
    Please let us know which of offices would most convenient for you?
    Please enter the details of your enquiry
    Please enter the verification code
    Send us a message
  • Services for you
  • Services for business

Uber case highlights workers rights

Do you engage employees, workers or self-employed contractors or do you work under a contract of self-employment?

There have been a number of recent high profile cases in particular involving Uber and Citysprint which have involved challenges to purported self-employed contracts on the basis that staff are actually engaged as ‘workers’.

Why is it such a big issue?

Workers benefit from a number of rights including:

  • the national minimum wage;
  • holiday pay.

Self-employed contractors do not benefit from these rights although they do benefit from increased flexibility and potentially more favourable tax treatment.

The Uber drivers had not been paid national minimum wage or holiday pay and were claiming significant sums as a result of alleged underpayment.

The Uber case

Uber puts taxi drivers in touch with passengers using a technology platform. Uber argued that it was a simple technology platform and that it was in no way a provider of taxi services. Uber had complex contractual documentation in place which sought to govern the contractual relationship with the drivers and assert that they were self-employed. Uber argued that they did not have significant control over their drivers, a key factor when determining employment status. They believed that their tagline ‘Work for yourself, drive when you want, make the money you need’ gave the drivers sufficient flexibility to make them self-employed.

The Employment Tribunal disagreed and stated that Uber’s complex contractual documentation did not correspond with what happened in reality. Uber is in the business of providing taxi services and engaged the drivers as workers to deliver it services. The drivers were therefore entitled to the national minimum wage and holiday pay.

The Citysprint case involving a cycle courier has many similarities with the Uber decision. The Employment Tribunal confirmed that the courier was a worker rather than being self-employed in business on her own account.

What does this mean for the future?

It is more important than ever that your contractual documents actually reflect what happens in reality. It would be sensible for all business to assess the status of their workforce and tighten working arrangements and documentation.

The Uber case demonstrates that getting it wrong can be costly.

We can offer advice and assistance with:

  • reviewing current contracts, policies and procedures;
  • drafting new contracts, policies and procedures;
  • advising in respect of specific employment issues/Tribunal claims

Please contact Gemma Cook on 01983 535474 or gemma.cook@glanvilles.co.uk for advice or assistance.