The Uber appeal is underway, as the taxi app fights the landmark ruling that its drivers must be given basic workers’ rights.
In October 2016, drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam won a major case, at an employment tribunal, which found that they should be classed as workers.
This meant that the drivers – and potentially many others in the gig-economy – would be entitled to the minimum wage, sick pay and paid holiday.
But the taxi-hailing app has today begun a two-day appeal against the ruling – only days after TfL stripped it of its licence to operate in London. However, this is a separate case to any other ongoing case – including with other companies in the gig economy – it is argued.
Dinah Rose opening – Tfl decision irrelevant. Tribunal shouldn’t lump Uber in with other companies in ‘gig economy’ #uberappeal
— Ben Amunwa (@benamunwa) September 27, 2017
Rose had to address it head-on and now she does: Addison Lee judgment from yday – judgment here https://t.co/FMZ9SekNAb
— Mark Greaves (@mark_greaves1) September 27, 2017
— Rachel Farr (@rarfarr) September 26, 2017
Previously, the company claimed it was a platform not an employer. However, it may now claim it is no different to any other mini-cab company, with self-employed drivers.
The tribunal ruled the idea its 30,000 drivers could be linked by a common platform was “faintly ridiculous”.
Fact that Uber dealt with customers as if it was a principal did not prevent it being the agent of the drivers. #UberAppeal
— Darren Newman (@DazNewman) September 27, 2017
But Uber insists its drivers like the freedom of being their own boss.
Please do add your thoughts and initial reactions in the comments section below the piece.