Will UBER drivers be treated as employees in the future?
The decision of the Employment Tribunal of Great Britain could bring changes in the treatment of self-employed individuals providing a taxi service through mobile platforms. “The self-employed” employees of UBER in GB have been granted the claim for payment of the minimal wage and acknowledgement of other rights from employment relationship.
The Employment Tribunal heard a case of two former employees (and other) of the international corporation UBER, who claimed rights deriving from employment relationship – payment of minimal wage, paid vacation leave and paid sick leave. The Employment Tribunal granted the claim, which could result in litany of ramifications not only for the 40,000 taxi drivers that collaborate with UBER in Great Britain, but for all companies whose business model is based on providing a service via apps/mobile platforms.
The plaintiffs, as well as other drivers, have been providing taxi services through UBER. The concept is not alien, as in 2016 another provider entered the Slovenian market with the same service. The drivers step into the role of the driver by providing the taxi service, to those ordering the “taxi fare” through the UBER mobile application. The employees stated that they were working under immense pressure, with long working hours and were not free to decide whether to accept (or decline) a fare. In some months, employees earned less than GBP 5 per hour, which is less than the minimum statutory hourly wage in Great Britain (i.e. GBP 7.20 per hour for individuals aged 25 and over). Further, it was determined that in cases where drivers did decline a fare or where they contended the price of the service, they were fined. UBER attempted to prove that the drivers were not employed by UBER. UBER contested that, they are only a) a mobile platform, representing a mosaic of 30,000 small businesses, b) helping to grow the smaller businesses and c) drivers are afforded the opportunity to negotiate the fare.
UBER further claimed that the plaintiffs are not employees of UBER and as such enjoy the freedom and flexibility of self-employment, which as employees they would not have. The Employment Tribunal did not concur with this line of argument, but concluded that the employers are obliged to follow the conditions and obligations provided by UBER and are consequently in a subordinate position.
UBER has already announced that it will appeal the decision, whereby the employees will have to wait for all pay-outs until the end of the judicial process. If the decision of the Employment Tribunal is upheld, it should be noted, that this could have a far-reaching consequence for all service providers with a comparable business model as UBER, since this would require a change to the existing business model, price policy and thereby the loss of its primary competitive advantage.
