employment rights as other full time employees in Britain. This trial court decision was the result of a case brought against Uber by two drivers backed by the British The Trade Union (“GMB”). ruling by the UK judge entitled Uber drivers to earn the national minimum wage, holiday pay, sick pay, and other benefits. Uber unsuccessfully argued that it was a that “technology platform” enables users to schedule transportation, which also does not function as a transportation provider because transportation services are provided by party contractors who “independent third are not employed by The reason for the argument was so Uber.” Uber would not be obliged to provide the kinds of statutory employment rights full-time workers would expect. Maria Ludkin, the the case union’s legal director, said and claimed it would a represented “a monumental victory” “have for drivers, of whom there are hugely positive impact” Uber’s around 40,000 in Britain. She went on to further state, Uber drivers and other directed workers do have legal rights at work. The question for them now is how those rights are enforced in practice. The clear answer is that the workforce must combine into the GMB union to force the company to recognize these rights and to negotiate fair terms and conditions for the drivers. Uber, for now, is sticking to its independent contractor argument, and its UK general manager Jo Bertram has vowed to appeal the She stated, court’s decision. Tens of thousands of people in London drive with Uber precisely because they want to be and their own boss. The overwhelming majority of drivers who use the Uber app want to keep the freedom and flexibility of being able to drive when and where they want. While the decision of this preliminary hearing only affects two people we will be appealing it. However, the court in its ruling insisted that, “the notion that Uber in London is a mosaic of 30,000 small business linked by a is to our minds faintly ridiculous. Drivers do common ‘platform’
employment rights as other full time employees in Britain. This trial court decision was the result of a case brought against Uber by two drivers backed by the British Trade Union (“GMB”). The ruling by the UK judge entitled Uber drivers to earn the national minimum wage, holiday pay, sick pay, and other benefits. Uber unsuccessfully argued that it was a “technology platform” that enables users to schedule transportation, which also does not function as a transportation provider because transportation services are provided by “independent third party contractors who are not employed by Uber.” The reason for the argument was so Uber would not be obliged to provide the kinds of statutory employment rights full-time workers would expect. Maria Ludkin, the union’s legal director, said the case represented “a monumental victory” and claimed it would “have a hugely positive impact” for Uber’s drivers, of whom there are around 40,000 in Britain. She went on to further state, Uber drivers and other directed workers do have legal rights at work. The question for them now is how those rights are enforced in practice. The clear answer is that the workforce must combine into the GMB union to force the company to recognize these rights and to negotiate fair terms and conditions for the drivers. Uber, for now, is sticking to its independent contractor argument, and its UK general manager Jo Bertram has vowed to appeal the court’s decision. She stated, Tens of thousands of people in London drive with Uber precisely because they want to be and their own boss. The overwhelming majority of drivers who use the Uber app want to keep the freedom and flexibility of being able to drive when and where they want. While the decision of this preliminary hearing only affects two people we will be appealing it. However, the court in its ruling insisted that, “the notion that Uber in London is a mosaic of 30,000 small business linked by a common ‘platform’ is to our minds faintly ridiculous. Drivers do
05-%20NY%20ETHAN%20RUBIN%20-%20REFORMATTED%20-%20Final%20Article%20Draft.docx