Two drivers win landmark tribunal case

LONDON, ENGLAND - DECEMBER 22:  An Uber driver poses for a photograph in an Uber t-shirt and holding a smart phone displaying the Uber app after delivering petitions to the Transport for London headquarters on December 22, 2015 in London, England. The Uber drivers formally handed in the petition, signed by over 205,000 people, to oppose proposals such as introducing minimum 5 minute waiting times.  (Photo by Carl Court/Getty Images)

Two drivers have won a landmark employment case that could have significant implications for private hire firms and even delivery firms. See also Barrister: Daniel Barnett’s Employment Law Bulletin.

The UBER private hire company insists that its 40,000 drivers are “partners”. A London Employment Tribunal has ruled that two of its drivers are employees and therefore entitled to sick pay, a guaranteed minimum wage, holiday pay and breaks.  The private hire company have indicated that they will be appealing the ET ruling. They also say that the ruling only affects “two people”. While that may be their current argument, it is clear that  the ruling sets a precedent that (without a successful appeal) opens the door for all remaining UBER drivers to claim that they have similar employment rights. This case could also open the driver’s door for many men and women who drive for parcel and delivery firms

About Dr Peter Jepson

I am the editor of this LawsBlog. On the 31st August 2014, I retired as Head of the Department of Social Sciences at Strode's College, Egham, Surrey. In that post I was responsible for the subject areas of Laws, Politics, Sociology, and Humanities. Prior to that, also at Strode's College, I managed Laws, Politics, Citizenship, the AQA Baccalaureate, and the Extended Project Qualification.
This entry was posted in Main Page. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.