[UK] Supreme Court making final Uber ruling

The Supreme Court is in the process of hearing evidence to arrive at a final ruling about the employment status of Uber drivers in the UK. Its ruling will end a dispute which has been active since 2016. Uber BV and others v Aslam and others will definitively establish whether Uber’s 45,000 - primarily London based - drivers are workers rather than self-employed and therefore entitled to the national minimum wage, holiday pay and paid rest breaks. An employment tribunal previously found in favour of the drivers in a case brought by the GMB union and law firm Leigh Day, in October 2016. (Link via original reporting)

At the time the ruling was described as “a monumental victory” by Maria Ludkin, GMB’s legal director. Ms Ludkin reportedly said, “This loophole that has allowed unscrupulous employers to avoid employment rights, sick pay and minimum wage for their staff and costing the government millions in lost tax revenue will now be closed.” Personnel Today explores how the case has evolved since 2016 and what the implications of a final ruling will be.

The Supreme Court is in the process of hearing evidence to arrive at a final ruling about the employment status of Uber drivers in the UK. Its ruling will end a dispute which has been active since 2016. Uber BV and others v Aslam and others will definitively establish whether Uber’s 45,000 - primarily London based - drivers are workers rather than self-employed and therefore entitled to the national minimum wage, holiday pay and paid rest breaks. An employment tribunal previously found in favour of the drivers in a case brought by the GMB union and law firm Leigh Day, in October 2016. (Link via original reporting)

At the time the ruling was described as “a monumental victory” by Maria Ludkin, GMB’s legal director. Ms Ludkin reportedly said, “This loophole that has allowed unscrupulous employers to avoid employment rights, sick pay and minimum wage for their staff and costing the government millions in lost tax revenue will now be closed.” Personnel Today explores how the case has evolved since 2016 and what the implications of a final ruling will be.