Friday, November 10, 2017

Uber Lose Appeal Against Landmark Ruling And Must Treat Drivers As Employees

Uber ordered to treat drivers as employees with full rights after losing appeal in landmark case

Uber has lost its appeal against a landmark ruling ordering it to treat its drivers as employees, paying them minimum wage and affording them full rights including sickness and holiday pay.

Two drivers, James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam, won the first round of the case in October last year.

But Uber challenged the ruling at the Employment Appeal Tribunal in London, saying it could deprive drivers of the “personal flexibility they value”.

Judge Jennifer Eady QC handed down her judgement months after Uber was dealt another blow by Transport for London (TfL), which said it will not renew the firm's licence.

The US-based Minicab operator has launched a separate appeal against that decision.

Huge relief'

James Farrar told how he was feeling: "Just huge relief. I really hope it will stick this time and that Uber will obey the ruling of the court. 

"I'd like Uber to sit down and work out how as quickly as possible that every driver who is working for Uber get the rights they are entitled to."

The GMB union, which backed the case, said the ruling, by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), was a "landmark victory" for workers' rights, especially in the gig economy, a system of casual working which does not commit a business or a worker to set hours or rights.

Maria Ludkin, the GMB's legal director, said: "Uber must now face up to its responsibilities and give its workers the rights to which they are entitled.

"GMB urges the company not to waste everyone's time and money dragging their lost cause to the Supreme Court."

'Freedom to chose'

Tom Elvidge, Uber UK's acting general manager, said: "Almost all taxi and private hire drivers have been self-employed for decades, long before our app existed. 

"The main reason why drivers use Uber is because they value the freedom to choose if, when and where they drive and so we intend to appeal."

He went on to say that EAT's decision relied on an assertion that drivers were required to take 80% of trips sent to them when logged into the app, but, he said, "as drivers who use Uber know, this has never been the case in the UK".

He also said a number of changes had been made to the app over the last year, and that Uber had "invested in things like access to illness and injury cover".


All over bar the shouting... Not quite!!!

Just when you thought it was all over, it suddenly goes on....and on...and on. 

The judge has given Uber 14 days to appeal the verdict, according to the UPHD. 

It seems the only sure fired winners are the legal profession, who must be having a field day.



Anonymous said...

Uber. They are an American tax avoiding company that wish to exploit workers with poor pay so that they can undercut existing British taxi companies to put them out of business. And they are supported by the unpatriotic British Tory government who only look after themselves and the wealthy tax dodgers. Outrageous.

Anonymous said...

The problem is that it must be cheaper to hire lawyers and keep making appeals than to give worker rights and fair pay. Their license should be revoked so they have to stop operating while appeal process takes place otherwise Uber are taking the piss out of the judiciary and the whole government and country. And the government allow it because they are just as dodgy.