Uber loses in the Supreme Court: drivers are workers, not self-employed
On 19 februari 2021 the Supreme Court upheld the Employment Tribunal’s decision in the Uber BV v Aslam & Others case. It was held that Uber drivers are ‘workers’ and not self-employed.
The facts
The court considered several elements in its judgment:
- Uber determines the fare, which means they decide how much drivers may earn;
- Uber determines the contractual terms, without any drivers say in them;
- Uber controls ride requests and may penalise drivers if they decline too many rides; and
- Uber monitors driver service levels through their star rating system and has the ability to discipline drivers and even terminate the contract if their level of service does not improve.
As a result, Uber’s appeal stating that it was an intermediary was dismissed. Taking the above into account, the court held that the documentation between the parties did not match with the reality of the work. Instead, it was decided that drivers were working for Uber and are therefore classed as ‘workers’. It was determined that Uber’s drivers are working whenever they are logged on to the app, whether or not they have a passenger.
What does this mean for employers?
The significance of being classed as a worker is that it means Uber drivers are entitled to claim a minimum wage based upon their ‘working day’ (whenever they are logged on to the app). This leaves Uber vulnerable to employment claims from its workers as they are able to claim up to 2 years’ backpay or £25,000 (whichever is larger) in an employment tribunal.
The workers are also able to claim paid annual leave and will have whistleblowing and other rights. It is important to note however, they do not have ‘employee’ rights such as the right to a redundancy payment or to claim unfair dismissal.
Key takeaway
This case should remind employers that a tribunal may find that you are not bound by that language of your documentation. The tribunal will look at all the facts of the case when determining worker status and rights. Our employment team regularly advise and review contracts for employers of all sizes. Please contact us if you would to discuss an audit of contractual documentation for your organisation.
For further information, or to discuss the issues raised by this update, please contact our Employment Group on 0118 977 4045 or employment@herrington-carmichael.com.
Dit weerspiegelt de wet op de datum van publicatie en is geschreven als een algemene leidraad. Het bevat geen definitief juridisch advies, dat in voorkomend geval met betrekking tot een bepaalde zaak moet worden ingewonnen.
Contacteer ons
De door u verstrekte informatie wordt behandeld in overeenstemming met ons privacybeleid.
GRATIS: Juridisch inzicht en evenementennieuws
Keep you, your family and / or business up to date on how the law affects you, by subscribing to one of our legal insights.

Subscribe for free Legal Insights
& Event updates
Laatste artikelen
Would you rather: pay £62,381 in compensation OR make “reasonable adjustments”?
On 4 januari 2021, an employer was ordered to pay £62,381 to a Claimant, for failing to make “reasonable adjustments”.
Has your equality and diversity training gone “stale”?
Employers need to take “reasonable steps” to prevent discrimination in the workplace and this includes regular equality and diversity training.
Implied and Fiduciary duty at the end of employment
A recent case highlights the need for ex-employees and new employers to be aware of their implied duties & obligations of confidence.
Top Juridische Inzichten
Contractenrecht
Materiële contractbreuk
Wat is een 'wezenlijke' contractbreuk door een partij bij een commercieel contract? Dit is een kritische kwestie die regelmatig door de rechter wordt overwogen. Wat is een wezenlijke inbreuk en wat zijn de rechtsmiddelen?
Eigendomsrecht
Commerciële lease: De financiële gevolgen voor de verhuurder en de huurder
Het Coronavirus (COVID-19) en de beperkingen die nu gelden om de verspreiding ervan onder controle te houden, hebben een aanzienlijk effect op veel bedrijfssectoren.
Echtscheiding en familierecht
Echtscheiding in Lockdown: Kan ik discreet juridisch advies krijgen?
We hebben met cliënten gesproken die helaas wat familiekwesties ondervinden, en die graag deskundig juridisch advies willen inwinnen, maar niet weten hoe...
Geschil over grond en onroerend goed
Beperkende Convenanten - De prijs van de wijziging
Als u vaststelt dat uw grond belast is met een restrictief convenant en voor de toepassing van dit artikel zal het betreffende convenant inhouden dat er slechts één woongebouw op de grond kan worden opgericht. Wat doet u vervolgens?
Bekroond juridisch advies
We zijn advocaten in Camberley, Wokingham en Londen. In 2019 won Herrington Carmichael 'Property Law Firm of the Year' bij de Thames Valley Business Magazines Property Awards, 'Best Medium Sized Business' bij de Surrey Heath Business Awards en werden we uitgeroepen tot IR Global's 'Member of the Year'. We zijn gerangschikt als Leading Firm 2020 door Legal 500 en Alistair McArthur is gerangschikt in Chambers 2020.









Londen
60 St Martins Lane, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4JS
Camberley
Building 2 Watchmoor Park, Riverside Way, Camberley, Surrey GU15 3YL
Wokingham (Appointment only)
4 The Courtyard, Denmark Street, Wokingham, Berkshire RG40 2AZ
info@herrington-carmichael.com
© 2020 Herrington Carmichael LLP. Geregistreerd in Engeland en Wales bedrijfsnummer OC322293.
Herrington Carmichael LLP is gemachtigd en gereguleerd door de Solicitors Regulation Authority.
Privacy | Legal Notices, T&Cs, Complaints Resolution | Cookies | Client Feedback